MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Poetry of the Swamp: Blok’s “Folks” Cycle Bubbles of the Earth

2001· article· en· W2085997140 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julie W. de Sherbinin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryLiteratureDictionNarrativeObject (grammar)PhilosophyHistoryArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

magical song and spell seem to to be primeval form of poetry. -Nietzsche, The Gay Science Bubbles of Earth (Puzyri zemli) comprises first lyric cycle in Aleksandr Blok's Second Book, book that contains his poetic output for years 1904-1908.1 The poems of Bubbles of Earth seem oddities, owning little by way of linkage to rest of Blok's oeuvre. The setting in most of poems is swamp; their diction derives from folk vernacular; and their narrative orientation is toward folk genres. In his 1907 review of cycle, Andrei Bely did most, perhaps, to damage reputation of poems by encouraging subsequent critics to regard them as horrid, painful, childish, and idiotic.2 Commentary on cycle, overall, has settled for slightly dismissive verdict of playfulness to account for Blok's interest in swamp creatures. This fate is undeserved by poems that in fact engage rather serious philosophical problems concerning powers of language and Symbolist attempt to reconcile and experience. While thirteen poems of Bubbles of Earth, composed in 1904 and 1905, present a thematic domain uncommon in Blok's properties associated with swamp locale directly engage his interest in an article of 1908, Poetry of Spells and Incantations (Poeziia zagovorov i zaklinanii). In that essay, Blok regards charms cast by sorcerers as gold of genuine poetry, and maintains that in art of incantation, word and act become indistinguishable and identical, subject and object, magician and nature, sweetness of complete (5:37, 47).3 The sorcerer's ability to effect a synthesis between language and physical surroundings represents an ideal of unity cherished by Symbolists. In Bubbles of Earth, Blok seems to experiment in imagining a world in which poet exercises wizardly powers. This essay will consider folk context of cycle, in particular, intimations of spells and incantations. I would like to suggest that route into center of swamp, represented by cycle's central poem, is created by poet's sorcerer-like use of language, but that poems in second half of cycle move away from this organic wholeness of world and word, becoming riddled with an irony that sunders totality of sought by poet. The ambition to unite proves unachievable for modern artist. Paul de Man writes that language of Romantic poetry seems to in desire to draw closer and closer to ontological status of object, but that language is incapable of achieving absolute identity with itself that exists in natural object. That cohesive identity is elusive because poetic words move beyond common meanings to originate anew over and over again. Because of this disjuncture, he claims, for most post-Victorian poets, the priority of nature is experienced as a feeling of failure and sterility.4 The Russian Symbolists shared with Romantic poets not only idea of an intimate harmony between nature and humankind (which artist can bring to consciousness with his supernatural gift-an intuition of ideal form of world5), but also a common interest in customs, language, songs and riddles of folk. Blok has often been identified as a Symbolist cognizant of his ties to Romanticism. What Blok finds in spells and incantations appears to take on dilemma outlined by de Man by positing a world in which subject and object experience sweetness of complete unity. …

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicScientific Research and Philosophical InquiryFrench-language works237,207