“Curiosity and the Desire of Beauty”: Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s <i>The Beloved</i> and Some Contingent Aesthetic Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using as a basis Walter Pater’s contention in the “Postscript” to Appreciations (1889) that “[c]uriosity and the desire of beauty, have each their place in art, as in all true art criticism,” this article offers an analysis of the inspiration, production, colorifics, iconography, and reception of Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s The Beloved (1865–66, 1873), a residually Pre-Raphaelite painting that Frederic George Stephens regarded as one of “the finest productions of . . . [Rossetti’s] genius and matured skills.” Demonstrating through the comments of Stephens and others that Victorians responded erotically to The Beloved, the article draws on Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment to assist in situating the painting and related works in the context of “art for art’s sake” and the emergence of modernist aesthetics. In doing so, the article also situates The Beloved among central issues of Victorian scholarly and theoretical debate such as race, materialism, and gendered viewing.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".