“Les Névroses” de Maurice Rollinat: une tentative de retour/recours fin-de-siècle à la nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maurice Rollinat’s Les Névroses (1883) exhibits a distinctively original feature as a work of poetry; it draws on two kinds of inspiration that are usually regarded as categorically opposed if not categorially exclusive, that, artificialist, of decadent poetry, on the one hand, and that, naturist, of rustic poetry, on the other. A close reading of the work suggests that the relationships between these two poetic trends are to be conceived not only in terms of opposition, as critics would normally do, but also in terms of hybridization. We intend here to draw attention to the main aspects of this singular hybridization of aesthetic codes and values, and to capture its global symbolic motivation by presenting it as a tentative decadent return/resort to nature.Through this aesthetic gesture, as we will suggest, Rollinat extends the “quivering” of modern sensitivity to natural order. By doing so, he allows for the use of pastoral and animal motifs which are usually excluded from poetic representation of fin-de-siecle modernity. Conversely, he also provides a new possibility of revitalisation or regeneration for the Baudelairian poetic paradigm. We will postulate that the fact that this possibility remains in the end unexploited by other poets and that Rollinat came to be associated, both in the eyes of his contemporaries and in the memory of posterity, with a rather unfortunate epigone of Baudelaire could be attributed to two reasons: his poetic ethos generally maladapted to decadent aesthetics and, more importantly, the radicalism of his endeavour which brings the decadent logic of the sensation to a point of self-contradiction pragmatically untenable.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".