London of the Mind—The Narrative of Psychogeographic Antiquarianism in Selected London Novels of Peter Ackroyd
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peter Ackroyd is traditionally listed among the foremost contemporary representatives of British psychogeographic writing, along with Iain Sinclair, J. G. Ballard, Stewart Home and Will Self. However, his approach differs from those of his more outspoken fellow-psychogeographers both in scope and form, not so much in his non-fiction London: The Biography (2000), but then all the more noticeably in his novels. Using four of his London novels, Hawksmoor (1985), Dan Leno and the Limehouse Golem (1994), The Lambs of London (2004) and The Casebook of Victor Frankenstein (2008), this paper argues that Ackroyd’s treatment of the relationship between his protagonists’ psyches and the urban territory they inhabit or move along can be more appropriately labelled as psychogeographic antiquarianism, as it is based on storing up and reenacting the city’s accumulated experience and probing the various impacts on the minds of its dwellers.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".