<i>Askesis</i>as Aesthetic Home: Edward Perry Warren, Lewes House, and the Ideal of Greek Love
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the queer writings of Boston-born Edward Perry warren (1860–1928) and the spaces of his Lewes House, East Sussex, that formed the basis of his Uranian ideal. warren, along with his personal secretary (aka lover), John Marshall, amassed an impressive collection of mainly antiquities, most of which helped to form the Boston Museum of Fine Art. At Lewes House warren conceived a community of younger, liked-minded men, many of whom benefited directly from his financial generosity and guidance. For the owner of the house education and intellectual pursuits were the guiding principles behind what was ultimately an ancient-Greek inspired homosocial community. Lewes House was austere and coded as a space for both his much celebrated collection and community, each being an extension of the other. In his three-volume The Defence of Uranian Love (1928), written under the pseudonym of Arthur Lyon Raile, warren falls within a specific literary tradition of queer authors at the end of the nineteenth century who turned back to ancient Greece as a preferred exemplary society in which an older male figure took a younger male under his tutelage and protection, guiding him to his adult life. An important missing component of the Greek ideal that men like warren espoused and wrote about was the space in which this ideal could be performed, worked through, and aestheticized.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".