La légende de Raphaël. Les « grandes » et les « petites » vies d’une figure exemplaire de l’art, écrites en France au cours du XIXe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considering the lives of Raphael written in nineteenth-century France, this article examines the epistemological status and the ideological function of an important genre of art historical writing: the artist monograph. During a period characterized by new scientific ambitions and by the development of the discipline within academic institutions, the Vasarian model of the vita undergoes a number of changes that do not, however, alter in a significant way its celebrational purpose. Especially throughout the biographical anecdotes that sustain the narrative of his famous career (like the episode of his love affair with la Fornarina), Raphael remains both the great man and the angelic figure concocted by tradition, combining pagan and Christian standards of excellence, a pattern that finds itself repeated in the more popular versions of Raphael's lives, whether written for educational or for recreational purposes. The success story proposed by the life of Raphael – one of the artists most written about in France between 1800 and 1900 – establishes a poignant contrast with the destiny of the modern artist elaborated in contemporary literature, under the aegis of bohemia. It suggests that art history likes winners and not losers and that the genre of the artist monograph always serves some ideological purpose, like compensating fantasmatically for the economic, social and political insecurities of the times.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".