MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

E. G. Browne, the Persophile: Orientalism in <i>A Year Amongst the Persians</i>

2022· article· en· W4306180101 on OpenAlexaff
Marziyeh Ghoreishi

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorians Institute Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismOrientPersianThe ImaginaryMiddle EastHistoryIrrationalityLiteratureSociologyArtPhilosophyPsychologyEpistemologyPsychoanalysisLinguisticsRationality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In his seminal Orientalism, Edward Said describes the Orient as a cultural construction of the East, represented by Europeans as a point of contrast to the West. The Orient thus comes to be seen as an Other against the Western Self, conveying a set of characteristics that are typically considered to be feminine and encompass such features as sensuality, irrationality, and violence. These features are set against a masculine, strong, and rational West. Travel writing in particular has been concerned with the exercise of power and authority in the Orient. Using Said’s theory of Orientalism, this article looks at Edward Granville Browne’s A Year Amongst the Persians to examine Browne’s perception and understanding of Iran and Iranians. Browne began learning Persian in 1882 and subsequently became a Persophile and admirer of Persian language and culture. He spent 1887–8 in Iran and among Iranians and published his travelogue in 1893. For a better understanding of Browne’s position on imperialism and Orientalism, the article examines the writings of some British travelers and explores the cultural bias implicit in their works and their construction of the “imaginary” Orient and uses that as a point of comparison and contrast with Browne’s travelogue.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorians Institute JournalSame topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207