Bibliographic record
Abstract
Priscilla Hunt and Svitlana Kobets. Holy Foolishness in Russia: New Perspectives. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers, 2011. viii, 405 pp. Colour Illustrations. Bibliography. $36.70, paper.Holy Foolishness in Russia: New Perspectives, edited by Priscilla Hunt and Svitlana Kobets, is collection of essays exploring phenomenon of holy foolishness in Russia from eleventh century to present. From hagiography and hymnology to contemporary Russian performance art, articles demonstrate intimate relationship between stories themselves and historical contexts in which they were told. Of particular interest in this volume is comparative analysis of how interpretations of holy foolishness and holy fools have changed over time. The enduring significance of certain texts to interpretation of holy foolishness in various historical settings, such as Vita of Andrew Fool of Constantinople,1 is also evident through combined efforts of these authors.It is impossible to give every chapter its due; however, brief overview will provide glimpse into breadth and insight available in book, as well as some of its limitations. The first four articles provide framework within which research in this volume is to be understood. Hunt opens discussion by emphasizing groundbreaking influence of A. M. Panchenko's phenomenological approach to topic (p. 3) as well as the importance of holy foolishness as an ongoing pattern of (p. 5). This is followed by survey of historical, cultural, and textual developments regarding holy foolishness, written by Kobets.Next, work of A. M. Panchenko, Laughter as Spectacle (first published in D. S. Likhachev, A. M. Panchenko, and Ν. V. Ponyrko, Smekh ν Drevnei Rusi [Nauka, 1984] 72-153) is translated into English for first time. Panchenko makes connections between Russian and European traditions and culture and draws out similarities and differences between holy fools and jesters (pp. 52,110), identifying holy foolishness as a 'serious' variation on world of laughter (p. 147). He then examines role of spectacle and fool's relationship with his audience, and connection between holy foolishness and social protest, with particular attention to paradigm of status reversal (p. 128) as well as relationship between Old Believers and holy fools. The translators have provided great service in making this influential work available to broader audience. Where possible, they have also updated footnotes to include information on sources available in translation.The other articles in book demonstrate extent to which Panchenko's work has been seminal in this field of research. In her examination of The Vita of Andrew of Constantinople and its relationship to Russian urban holy foolishness, Hunt rejects Panchenko's focus on language of carnival and instead emphasizes importance of imperial liturgy and spectacle and Byzantine model of holy foolishness. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".