MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796692995 · doi:10.14288/1.0365527

Romancing modernity : poetry, process, and postsecularism

2020· article· en· W2796692995 on OpenAlexaff
William Ilan Rubel

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernityPoetryProcess (computing)ArtAestheticsLiteratureComputer sciencePhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study reads key British Romantic texts (The Prelude, Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience, The Book of Thel, Jerusalem, The Fall of Hyperion, The Triumph of Life, and Frankenstein) through the lens of integral philosophy, radical aesthetics, and speculative feminism. Its primary theoretical context is a postsecular shift in recent speculative realist thought, which is making the etho-ecological metaphysics of romantic poetry newly legible. As the term speculative realism remains ill-defined, in this context it should be understood in the “organic realist” tradition of aesthetic ontologists such as Massumi and Stengers, inspired by Whitehead and Deleuze, rather than the tradition of object-oriented ontologists such as Harman and Morton, inspired by Heidegger. A key claim of this study is that these versions of speculative realism constitute two different kinds of materialism, one of which might be called critical materialism (optics) and the other speculative materialism (haptics). The critical materialist approach, it is suggested, has dominated the affective turn in romantic studies, in ways that perpetuate skepticism about the more-than-human etho-ecological mode of attention presented in romantic poetry. To clarify the confused model of affect that results from the conflation of these materialisms, this study attempts to flesh out the difference that speculative materialist and critical materialist perspectives make to the interpretation of romantic poems. It finds that the latter perpetuates a modern private optics and centered metaphysics while the former ventures toward a postsecular haptics or etho-ecological metaphysics. This study has been entitled Romancing Modernity: Poetry, Process, and Postsecularism, to engage the widest possible audience. The title foregrounds the argument that the British Romantics challenged the modern bar on etho-ecological attention, advancing an alternative modernity that speculative feminists and ecosophical thinkers are now restoring to view. An alternative title, which would draw attention to its more specific argument about romantic poetry, is “Earth’s Answer”: Etho-ecological Modernity and Haptic Aesthetics in Blake, Wordsworth, and the Second-Generation Romantics.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.169
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207