Andrews Wanning, from Criticism and Principles: Poetry of the Quarter, 'Southern Review', Spring 1941
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The poem, plainly enough, resumes many of the themes of &s;Burnt Norton,&s; but it resumes them with a difference. In &s;Burnt Norton,&s; the subject is the state of being symbol ized by the ecstasy in the garden; in &s;East Coker&s; the subject is more precisely the effort to attain that state of being. The real fulfillment whose emotional quality was so beautifully established in &s;Burnt Norton&s; is now merely suggested by reference back to the earlier poem; the tone as a whole is not confident. The conditions &s;seem unpropitious&s;; for us there is perhaps &s;neither gain nor loss ... only the trying.&s; &s;East Coker&s; seems to be Eliot&s;s &s;Ulysses,&s; though his quest is at least allegor-^- ized in more spiritual terms than in Tennyson&s;s poem. But the parallels are striking: &s;Old men ought to be explor ers,&s; says Eliot. In each what is valuable is the trying, not gain or loss; and in each there is a tone of forlorn ness, though the end proposed is a fulfillment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".