Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book examines the role of books and reading in relation to five itinerant constituencies in the long nineteenth century. It provides a critique of influential approaches to the history of reading within the context of the British empire. Beginning with the figure of the ‘hermeneutic castaway’ in <italic>Robinson Crusoe</italic>, it moves on to explore this and other phenomena as they were manifest among shipboard emigrants, Australian convicts, Scottish settlers in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, among polar explorers, and in the trenches of the First World War. In each instance, it explores the tensions between official prescriptive reading cultures and the everyday responses of ordinary readers themselves. Far from demonstrating the confidence and coherence of a British imperial project during this period, the evidence provided by a myriad reading experiences suggests an underlying disruption and tension in the way that reading subjects saw themselves and their political masters throughout the empire. Using archival, official, and other printed sources, the book sets out to show the diversity of readerly response in this period and what it can tell us about the complexity of the mentalities of ordinary subjects in an age of empire.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".