Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whitman's reception is crucial to the history of World Literature in the 20 th century.It involves especially transatlantic and hemispheric circulation.This article focuses on the latter and explores the importance of Whitman's poetry for American literatures and cultures, from Northern America (Quebec) to Latin America.Whitman was central to the development of a continental poetry and to the emergence of long poems in free verse that would embrace the immensity of American nature.Yet poets rapidly expressed the will not only to extend Whitman's poetry to the North or to the South, but to complement or even to correct it (especially in Brazil).In this process, Whitman unexpectedly became a reference for Black Americas.This move involves more political aspects, and Whitman was indeed strongly appropriated for partisan motives in Latin America, especially by communist poets like Pablo Neruda.The editorial policy towards Whitman, especially in the USSR and Eastern European countries, constructed the ideologically correct image of the poet who had foreseen communism.Our point is to show how entangled this reception is, what back and forth movements it involves, how Latin American interpretations had an impact on US readings, but also that a few transatlantic detours are necessary to clarify this hemispheric story.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".