MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952015597 · doi:10.1017/9781787444645.012

“Marriage? That's another story”: Reconsidering the Marital Trope in Robert Lowell's Poetry

2019· book-chapter· en· W2952015597 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Coleman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrope (literature)PoetryLiteratureHistoryGender studiesPsychoanalysisArtSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revisiting the Marriage Question WHAT DO WE THINK ABOUT when we think about Robert Lowell and marriage? A little over a decade ago, Grzegorz Kosc provided an important reading of the topic with regard to what he called the “counseling” influence of William Carlos Williams on Lowell's work. In the wake of Jeffrey Meyers's publication of Robert Lowell in Love (2015), however, in which the poet's marriages and other romantic/sexual relationships are presented as the key to understanding the poet's art, the question demands fresh consideration. The question is also important because Lowell explores the topic of marriage in several poems—so much so that it is explicitly flagged in several of his poems’ titles, from “‘To Speak of Woe That Is in Marriage’” in Life Studies (1959) to “Marriage,” which is partly based on Jan Van Eyck's painting The Arnolfini Portrait (1434), in Day by Day (1977). The list of such poems also includes “Marriage” in History (1973) and “Marriage?,” the fourth sonnet in a group of five entitled “Caroline” in The Dolphin (1976). The Dolphin also includes a sixteen-sonnet sequence entitled “Marriage.” These poems and groups of poems in themselves signal Lowell's recurring concern with the question of marriage, and his sense of its complexity. This is to be expected, perhaps, of a poet who was himself married three times. When considering the issue of Lowell and marriage, indeed, our first impulse might be to refer to the poet's actual marriages to Jean Stafford, Elizabeth Hardwick, and Caroline Blackwood. It is undoubtedly useful to know that Lowell was married to Stafford in the 1940s, and the story of his marriage to Hardwick, from 1949 until their divorce in 1972, when he married Blackwood, is also a central part of the narrative of his artistic and cultural emergence. The poet clearly used his experience of marriage to these three women as material for his work, but readers of Lowell—or any poet, for that matter—should also know that the relationship between life and art is never straightforward. The problem with Meyers's reading of Lowell is that he does not explore the complexity of this issue but, rather, sees the poems as providing what he calls an “autobiographical bounty” for the researcher.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.002

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.140 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207