MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897036216 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2018.0040

Victorian Pain by Rachel Ablow

2018· article· en· W2897036216 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
April Patrick

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationSubjectivitySociologyPsychoanalysisPsychologyEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Victorian Pain by Rachel Ablow April Patrick (bio) Rachel Ablow, Victorian Pain ( Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017), pp. x + 191, $39.95/ £32.95 hardcover. In Victorian Pain, Rachel Ablow considers how texts by John Stuart Mill, Harriet Martineau, Charlotte Brontë, Charles Darwin, and Thomas Hardy grapple with the nature of pain in a century where scientific advances changed human experience of physical discomfort. Rather than engaging with religious and theoretical debates about the use of medicine to eradicate pain, Ablow deftly analyzes how specific literary and philosophical texts used pain "to consider the implications of the forms of subjectivity and sociality that the texts themselves explore and seek to produce" (4). This focus, along with the selection of texts and authors, will likely make this project more relevant to those working in literary studies and philosophy than those working on the social and behavioral side of disability studies. The introductory chapter provides an overview of recent theories of pain as well as Victorian discourse about it. Ablow begins with the best-known theoretical approach from Elaine Scarry's The Body in Pain (1985), which represents pain as an inherently private experience that others cannot, no matter how much they wish to, ever know. Ablow's analysis places Scarry in conversation with, instead of in contrast to, theories of pain that recognize its connection to social life, exploring how pain connects the sufferer with others even if they cannot understand the experience. She builds upon these two approaches to consider how the authors in her study both think about pain and, more importantly to literary studies, use language to represent it. Ablow also lays out the contemporary Victorian conversation about pain and its uses, particularly in the context of newly discovered forms of anesthesia. Her contemporary sources range from volumes on philosophy and science to periodicals like the Westminster Review, Lancet, and British Medical Journal. As Ablow presents the structure of the chapters that follow, she very briefly—in just a single paragraph—summarizes the understanding of pain that shapes her own approach, noting the benefits and drawbacks of theorizing pain using Joanna Bourke's argument that the experience of pain is constructed partially through environmental interactions, Javier Moscoso's analysis of pain through theatrical elements, and Veena Das's description of pain as a transaction between sufferer and audience. The first three chapters of the volume explore the connections between pain and social life in nonfiction by John Stuart Mill and Harriet Martineau and in fiction by Charlotte Brontë. The first chapter focuses on the mental breakdown at the heart of Mill's Autobiography. Ablow reads it, in part, as a response to Mill's utilitarian education, citing heavily from his [End Page 570] father James Mill's writings about pain and the construction of sympathy. She also uses the possibility of compassion to connect the theories of James Mill to Scarry's over 150 years later. In response to the utilitarian views of his father, Mill develops what Ablow calls a social model of sensation as his "self-conscious difference from the collective constitutes the condition of [his] attachment to it" (34). This understanding of pain provides a foundation for the evolution of the concept through nineteenth-century essays, life-writing, and fiction. Chapter two draws on Martineau's Autobiography, Life in the SickRoom, Illustrations of Political Economy, and Household Education to explore how Martineau redefines pain in the context of liberal subjectivity and how her ideas were shaped by philosophy and religion. Ablow uses examples from Martineau's life-writing to demonstrate how she theorizes pain and the experience of it. Most of the quoted writing suggests not only that the invalid's condition separates her from social life but also that solitude from others who do not understand the pain is preferable. Ablow also resolves an apparent contradiction between Martineau's views on impersonality and her interest in mesmerism, which focuses on the connectedness between bodies in order to suggest that the connections drawn through mesmerism transcend corporeal social relations. In chapter three, the study turns from nonfiction to Brontë's novel Villette. Here, Ablow offers a perceptive close reading of Lucy Snowe's...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.004

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicHistory of Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207