MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251914567 · doi:10.3138/utq.80.4.918

‘Without Contraries There is No Progression’: Cinematic Montage and the Relationship of Illustration to Text in William Blake's <i>The [First] Book of Urizen</i>

2011· article· en· W4251914567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Garry Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMoravian Church and William Blake
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)IllusionHammerHeavenLiteratureArtPhilosophyArt historyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My claim is that Blake's illustrations are not a supplement depicting what happens in the text, but a translation into visual terms of his central tenet, at play throughout The [First] Book of Urizen, that ‘[w]ithout Contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate, are necessary to Human existence’ (The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, Plate 3). And I am claiming further that this strategy is comparable to the cinematic technique of montage: whereas the collision of two contrary images in montage creates an explosion famously described by Benjamin as ‘the dynamite of the tenth of a second’. Blake, too, creates tension and ‘collision’ in his illustrations in order to depict not the actual image of Los delivering his hammer blows, for example, but rather the hoped for effect of these blows – the breaking apart of Urizen's ‘solid without fluctuation’ (The [First] Book of Urizen, Plate 4). This ‘solid,’ if allowed to stand, imposes a restrictive view of the cosmos that reduces our visionary capacity to that of ‘two little orbs…fixed in two little caves/Hiding carefully from the wind…’ (The [First] Book of Urizen, Plate 12).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicMoravian Church and William BlakeFrench-language works237,207