Hogarth and Bad Taste: The Sculptures at St. Bartholomew’s as Satirical Inspiration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The engraving Masquerades and Operas (1724), also known as The Bad Taste of the Town, was William Hogarth’s first self-published work. Despite this milestone, it has become a footnote to more studied works such as The Rake’s Progress. I have discovered that Hogarth used sculptures from the Henry VIII Gate at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in London on his depiction of the Great Gate of Burlington House (home to the Royal Academy of Arts); I believe this is an overlooked element of the print that signals his distaste for foreign art. Hogarth strongly opposed Italianate painting and architecture, even painting frescoes at St. Bartholomew’s gratis, after learning the commission had gone to an Italian. Through visual, political, and contextual analysis, I argue that allusions to Raphael and Michelangelo in Masquerades and Operas associate Italian art with “lameness” and “disease” and are meant to show the decadence of Italian art and its impact on the arts in England. Their position on the Henry VIII Gate further alludes to the malignancy of the aristocracy, whom Hogarth saw as adversely affecting British culture by adopting foreign influences. The Brexit vote and global political turmoil are at the forefront of today’s political situation. In this regard, it is valuable to look back at times of significant cultural change and examine why artists like Hogarth, and contrastingly, Hogarth’s nemesis William Kent (a proponent of classical architecture inspired by Italian examples), strove for and against intercultural exchange.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".