MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079010585 · doi:10.1353/can.2006.0022

The Intimate Life of L.M. Montgomery (review)

2006· article· en· W2079010585 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAutobiographical and Biographical Writing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipLife writingPopularityGirlArt historyHistoryMedia studiesSociologyArtLawBiographyPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Intimate Life of L.M. Montgomery Heidi Macdonald The Intimate Life of L.M. Montgomery. Edited by Irene Gammel. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005. Pp. 302, illus. $29.95 This collection of twelve essays is drawn from papers presented at the Fifth International Biannual L.M. Montgomery Conference in 2002, which focused on Montgomery and life writing. It follows the publication of essays from the 2000 Montgomery conference, also edited by Irene Gammel, and titled Making Avonlea: L.M. Montgomery and Popular Culture (University of Toronto Press, 2002). The quality of these collections illustrates the depth of scholarly interest that has developed around Montgomery in the last twenty years, initially prodded by Mary Rubio and Elizabeth Waterston from the University of Guelph, who have since been joined by many impressive scholars not only in Canada but also in England, Scotland, Finland, the United States, and elsewhere. Despite the popularity of Montgomery's five published diaries and the increasing interest in her scrapbooks and photographs, relatively little scholarship existed on the author's life writing before the publication of this collection. Divided into four parts, 'Staging the Bad Girl,' 'Confessions and Body Writing,' 'Writing for the Intimate Audience,' and 'Where Life Writing Meets Fiction,' this collection goes a long way toward filling that gap. Montgomery fans and scholars have almost recovered from the shock of finding out, through Montgomery's published diaries, that the author known for sweet children's books was often depressed, had a very unhappy marriage, hated being a minister's wife, disliked many of her acquaintances, and was quite sarcastic. Now they are in for more surprises in this collection, which includes Gammel's edited version of the diary Montgomery co-authored with Nora Lefurgey for six months in 1903. The lighthearted diary was discovered in the University of Guelph Archives by Jennifer Litster, a University of Edinburgh Ph.D. candidate whose provocative essay on the diary is also included in this collection. In 'The Secret Diary of Maud Montgomery, Aged 28 1/4,' Litster notes, 'The [End Page 141] collaborative diary presents another self: a playful, self-confident young woman and proverbial social animal' (98). The second significant surprise is Gammel's essay, '"I loved Herman Leard madly": L.M. Montgomery's Confession of Desire,' which explores the significance of Montgomery falling in love with farmer Herman Leard in 1897 while still engaged to Edwin Simpson. Gammel explains that Montgomery was boarding with the Leard family while teaching in Bedeque, and notes, 'Although the sex act remains unconsummated, there is a great deal of kissing of lips and faces; on at least one occasion Herman kisses her fingers, wrist, and bare arm' (135–6). Gammel further explains that never again did Montgomery show such sexual passion, a passion that Gammel says grew out of a 'sexual aversion' to her fiancé Edwin Simpson: 'This unresolved conflict explains why this intensely controlled woman would plunge into a mad fling with Herman and record every single kiss and caress in her journal with the meticulousness of an accountant. She had something to prove to herself' (140). Historians may be disappointed with Gammel's sources, however, which include interviews with descendants of the relatives and acquaintances of Montgomery and Leard, who are remembering their second-hand versions of the context of the 'affair' a full century after it happened. On the other hand, Gammel's conclusions are in keeping with the codes of behaviour under which the affair happened. All of the essays in the collection are strongly grounded in theories of life writing that are applied appropriately to Montgomery's journals, scrapbook, and photos. Historians will find the theory applicable to unpublished diaries and other life writing of other women who never reached the level of fame that Montgomery did. For example, Janice Fiamengo writes of Montgomery's depression 'as a discourse rather than a biological fact,' concluding that 'Montgomery crafted an autobiographical "I" whose record of private pain had the power to shatter and rebuild her public identity' (184). Moreover, all the articles in the collection provide inter-textual analysis, usually between Montgomery's novels or her novels and journals, but also between her...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it