MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592973052 · doi:10.33137/rr.v37i1.21283

Red Herrings and the “Stench of Fish”: Subverting “Praise” in Thomas Nashe’s <i>Lenten Stuffe</i>

2014· article· en· W2592973052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristen Abbott Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtNarrativeErasmus+PraiseArt historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Lenten Stuffe, “praise” emerges as a red herring diverting readers from recognizing how Thomas Nashe telescopes his chorography of Yarmouth into a catalogue of arbitrary Crown rule from William the Conqueror’s rule through the English Reformation. So too is Nashe’s apology for contributing to the seditious play, Ile of Dogs. Historical circumstances surrounding the Swan Theatre and a stolen diamond complicate conventional readings of this incident, Nashe’s exile, and subsequently, the sincerity of Nashe’s encomium. Lastly, this essay examines Nashe’s projection of the Butcher and Fishmonger’s debate surrounding the arbitrariness of Lenten laws from Erasmus’s colloquy “A Fish Diet” into the red herring’s fictional ascent to human and divine monarchy. Erasmus’s joke in “Fish Diet” is at the expense of the Fishmonger, but Nashe elides his geographical and political targets to generate a subtext of outrage directed at Crown rule and English Reform.
 Dans Lenten Stuffe, la louange apparait comme un leurre empêchant les lecteurs de reconnaitre la façon dont Thomas Nashe condense sa chorographie de Yarmouth en un catalogue des lois arbitraires de la Couronne pendant le règne de William le Conquérant et la Réforme anglaise. Il en est de même pour les excuses de Nashe quant à sa contribution à la pièce de théâtre séditieuse, Ile of Dogs. Les circonstances historiques entourant le Théâtre du cygne et un diamant volé compliquent la lecture conventionnelle de cet incident, l’exil de Nashe, et, par la suite, la sincérité de son panégyrique. En dernier lieu, cet essai examine la projection par Nashe du débat entre le boucher et le poissonnier, concernant le caractère arbitraire des lois du carême et provenant du colloque d’Erasmus « Un régime de poisson », sur l’ascen- sion fictive du hareng saur à la monarchie humaine et divine. La blague d’Erasmus dans « Un régime de poisson » est au détriment du poissonnier, mais Nashe omet ses cibles géographiques et politiques pour générer un discours sous-entendant l’indignation dirigée à la Couronne et à la Réforme anglaise.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207