Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fin de siècle poetry was often both anti-Victorian and anti-bourgeois in spite of the fact that its authors were frequently middle-class Victorians. While Victoria's reign did not end until 1901, during the last quarter of the nineteenth century poetry was moving away from those forms and styles that had come to be considered most quintessentially Victorian. By the time a sense of 'Victorian' values and aesthetics had been recognised and labelled as such, poets were able self-consciously to define their work in opposition to them, sometimes explicitly disavowing any affinity. It is for this reason that the last quarter of the century is often identified with the death of the Victorian aesthetic, and Decadence perceived as the wringing out of the last drops of a faded and over-played aesthetic. Yet, if this was the period in which Victorian poetry died, it was without a doubt the period in which many new poetries were born. In comparison with the lucrative novel, the economic marginality of poetry by this point in the century undoubtedly put it in a different relationship with its recent heritage. Much less likely to be loyal to tried and tested formulas, poetry begins to see itself as avant-garde. What we see in poetry of the period is not so much the limbo of 'transition' to modernist concerns, however, but what Richard Le Gallienne identified as a self-conscious desire for a new aesthetic and a new beginning. The death of Alfred Lord Tennyson in 1892 can be seen as a symbolic marker of the fate of Victorian poetry. The well-attended funeral demonstrated that many ordinary people, whether or not they read poetry, felt the poet laureate represented something significant about national identity and pride. After Tennyson died, however, the post remained empty until the unexpected appointment of Alfred Austin in 1896.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.114 | 0.056 |
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".