MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036874520 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2019.0064

The Life and Loves of E. Nesbit: Victorian Iconoclast, Children’s Author, and Creator of The Railway Children by Eleanor Fitzsimons

2019· article· en· W3036874520 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Bilston

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGothic Literature and Media Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsBiographyPassionHistoryArt historySociologyLiteratureArtLawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Life and Loves of E. Nesbit: Victorian Iconoclast, Children’s Author, and Creator of The Railway Children by Eleanor Fitzsimons Sarah Bilston (bio) The Life and Loves of E. Nesbit: Victorian Iconoclast, Children’s Author, and Creator of The Railway Children by Eleanor Fitzsimons; pp. 400.Harry N. Abrams, 2019. $24.98 cloth. E.nesbit is a somewhat marginal figure in Victorian studies. Beloved by bookish Brits of a certain age, she is far less well known in North America and draws mixed reactions from readers (typical Amazon.com reviews designate her stories “very English,” written in a perplexing “British dialect”). She has not, in spite of Julia Briggs’s magisterial A Woman of Passion (1987), entirely benefited from literary studies’ late twentieth-century reclamatory urge (unlike, say, Mary Elizabeth Braddon), perhaps because she is best known for that perennially under-appreciated genre, the children’s novel. She is also one of those writers awkwardly on the cusp between Victorian and Edwardian, not quite in the “spirit of the age” of either. Yet Nesbit was, as Eleanor Fitzsimons’s new biography makes plain, not only a talented, [End Page 330] generative writer but also in the thick of Victorian and Edwardian literary and political life. Known to and by just about everybody, Nesbit’s at-homes were important nodes in the era’s social and literary networks. She attracted all sorts of rising journalists, writers, and thinkers to her suburban houses in and around south London to “discuss politics into the small hours,” enjoy literary talk, and play hide-and-seek (137). Victorianists and literary scholars will find a veritable Who’s Who of familiar figures in the pages of Fitzsimons’s new book: Olive Schreiner, Oscar Wilde, Richard Le Gallienne, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, G.B. Shaw, H.G. Wells, E.M. Forster, Annie Besant, and more attest to Nesbit’s important and valued place in turn-of-the-century literary and political culture. Fitzsimons’s book identifies the wellsprings of Nesbit’s quirky, imaginative literature in the writer’s unconventional life, from a childhood spent touring crypts to an adulthood in a ménage à trois. Nesbit’s friend, Alice Hoatson, lived with the writer and her husband, Hubert Bland, as housekeeper, companion—and Bland’s lover; Hoatson bore two children, both of whom were raised and adopted by Edith. Indeed, Nesbit seems largely to have accepted the relationship, and she enjoyed numerous extra- marital amours herself, including with fellow Fabians Shaw and Le Gallienne. Inevitably, a fair portion of Fitzsimons’s biography focuses on Nesbit’s entanglements and on the romances of the next generation—Rosamund, one of the Hoatson/Bland offspring, was involved with H.G. Wells as a teenager. Fitzsimons finds in Nesbit’s intriguing life history clues to her imaginative power, connecting the distinctive, “extraordinary” fiction with Nesbit’s “extraordinary” life (x), although, paradoxically, it is the author’s ability to connect with the ordinary, the everyday, that really distinguishes her: “The key to her brilliance was that she was one of us, and her magical adventures felt as if they could easily happen to you or to me” (x). The biographer’s passion for her subject, and for Nesbit’s fiction, is evident on every page, and Fitzsimons gives ample room to Nesbit’s coolly ironic voice, too. This is an immensely readable book that works hard to remind us of Nesbit’s place in literary London and in the field of children’s literature. Yet there is not, strictly speaking, much new here, in terms of raw facts: earlier biographers have covered similar ground, including, most recently, Elisabeth Galvin, in The Extraordinary Life of E. Nesbit (2018). Two earlier Nesbit biographies in particular laid out key new discoveries—Doris Langley Moore’s E. Nesbit (1933) drew on interviews with and letters from Nesbit’s family and friends, while Briggs’s A Woman of Passion was the first to really come to grips with the ins and outs of Nesbit’s unconventional marriage. And, indeed, a student keen to know more about, say, Wells’s love affair with Rosamund will find more in Briggs’s study, which remains the most serious, meticulously...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.008

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.242 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 venueVictorian reviewSame topicGothic Literature and Media AnalysisFrench-language works237,207