Resisting Linear Form: Sterne and Phillips with “nothing between them but / time”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Readers have certain expectations. Out of any given narrative we expect an introduction, body and conclusion. English words should flow logically one after the other, running from the left to right, in straight lines along the page. Any interruption to this linear process of reading may raise a range of emotional responses, whether it be confusion, anger, awe or insight. Early resistance to a linear reading experience is evident in Laurence Sterne’s 1759-1767 novel The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman. Unfolding over the course of nine volumes, this narrative is frequently interrupted with unusual visual and typographic experiments that remain puzzling and intriguing to readers to this day. Likely the most expensive and ambitious of Sterne's experiments is the third volume’s marbled page; a single page coated front and back in a layer of marbled paint, painstakingly and seamlessly constrained within the margins of the text-block. This paper explores the impact of these experiments on the reading experience, with particular attention to the marbled page, by looking towards the reception of Sterne in the contemporary work of book artist Tom Phillips. Despite being raised in the same discussions as examples of works that are intensely aware of their own form, there appears to be little analysis of the connection between Sterne and Phillips. Exploring the reception of Sterne in Phillips’ A Humument illuminates not only how Phillips references Sterne, but also how the very form and design of his work emulates a similar resistance to the linearity of reading and literate culture. Keywords: Laurence Sterne, marbled page, Tom Phillips, literate culture, linearity, reception
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".