British laughter and humor in the long 18th century
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This essay offers an overview of recent scholarship on British humor, satire, comedy, and laughter in the long 18th century. It focuses on scholarship that asks what provoked laughter in the 18th century, how the ethics and morals of laughter were gauged and contested, and what the political and social effects of laughter were, particularly in the context of cultural change and political crisis. Studies of laughter and humor demonstrate that 18th‐century British culture was, in many ways, not characterized by codes of politeness and sociability. Satiric laughter proved a potent but unpredictable political instrument, particularly in cases of anti‐religious humor, as likely to undermine or exceed humor's political objectives as it was to realize them. Laughter also generated new publics that wrested moral authority from traditional seats of power. Humor's effects were as multitudinous as the formal and rhetorical techniques it employed to generate feeling in readers and audiences, and the field has benefitted from a variety of methodologies and critical frameworks to explore its complex cultural and political functions.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it