MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2266494021 · doi:10.3138/ecf.27.3.343

“The General Entertainment of My Life”: The <i>Tatler</i>, the <i>Spectator</i>, and the Quidnunc’s Cure

2015· article· en· W2266494021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stuart Sherman

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporalitiesArgument (complex analysis)ComicsEntertainmentMediationHistoryArt historyArtSociologyLiteratureAestheticsMedia studiesVisual artsPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quidnunc—the news addict hooked on the latest dispatches— remained a figure of fun throughout the eighteenth century, partly because he functioned as a comic canary in the era’s ever-expanding coal mine of periodically printed news. Richard Steele coined the term and, with his collaborator Joseph Addison, satirized the affliction in the pages of the Tatler and the Spectator. Each periodical, in its own way, proposed the theatre as the quidnunc’s likeliest corrective and cure. The tactics by which they did so at once anticipate and rewire some powerful theories of performance and mediation: Peggy Phelan’s on the primacy of presence; Michael Warner’s on the distinctive temporalities—theatrical, periodical—inhabited by the early eighteenth century’s emerging, overlapping publics; Walter Benjamin’s on the different operations of “absorption” triggered by the singular, aureate work of art and the mass-directed entertainments made possible (and prolific) by modern technologies of reproduction. The quidnunc’s disorder is an obsession with the trivial, but Steele and Addison, over the course of their two papers, manage to spin from it an argument more momentous, about theatre, journalism, and time itself in Queen Anne’s age of burgeoning information.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century FictionSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207