"Different Planes of Sensuous Form": American Critical and Popular Responses to Elizabeth Barrett Browning's Aurora Leigh and Last Poems: Annotated Bibliography, American Periodicals, 1856-62
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In her dedication of Aurora Leigh to John Kenyon, Elizabeth Barrett Browning described her book as ‘‘the most mature of my works, and the one into which my highest convictions upon Life and Art have entered.’’2 Throughout her lifetime, from the publication of her first book in 1826, An Essay on Mind, through the publication of Poems Before Congress, the final volume of which was released before her death in 1861, she maintained her high poetic aspirations, often challenging poetic conventions with her diction, choice of subject matter, unconventional philosophies about women and their roles as poets and artists, and her stance on social, economic, and political issues of the day. The year 2006 marks the bicentennial of Browning’s birth, and it seems an opportune time to examine and to amplify, in some modest way, the bibliographical research done on Browning and her poetry. The purpose of this introductory essay and annotated bibliography is to examine previously undocumented reviews and essays of Aurora Leigh and Last Poems which appear in American periodicals during the years 1856-62. A second purpose is to record, through an explanation of the resources and methods utilized, how access to a new electronic database, the American Periodicals Series (APS) available from ProQuest, may augment the scholarship and bibliographic study of numerous nineteenth-century authors including Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Robert Browning, Christina Rossetti, and Charles Dickens.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".