MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312997314 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2022.0014

The Victorian Cult of Shakespeare: Bardology in the Nineteenth Century by Charles LaPorte

2022· article· en· W4312997314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marija Reiff

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultReverenceLiteratureScholarshipPejorativeCriticismLiterary criticismHistoryPhilosophyArtLawAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Victorian Cult of Shakespeare: Bardology in the Nineteenth Century by Charles LaPorte Marija Reiff (bio) The Victorian Cult of Shakespeare: Bardology in the Nineteenth Century by Charles LaPorte; pp. 213. Cambridge UP, 2021. Charles laporte begins his engaging examination of Victorian "bardology" (a term he invents as a counter to George Bernard Shaw's pejorative "bardolatry") with a simple request to the reader: to view the [End Page 131] Victorians' literary and religious investments in Shakespeare with "readerly sympathy" (24). This modest admonishment belies the capacious sweep of LaPorte's thesis, which details not just the Victorians' penchant to read Shakespeare through a religious lens but also the indebtedness of contemporary literature departments to reading literature, and Shakespeare in particular, with competing pieties that mirror those of nineteenth-century scholars. Although the bulk of The Victorian Cult of Shakespeare focuses on archival work, with each of its five chapters exploring little-known documents that reveal the creative ways Victorians imbued Shakespearean texts with religious meaning, LaPorte aims to do more than just recuperate the ostensibly naive Victorians who worshipped Shakespeare with a cult-like reverence and produced dubious, frequently humorous scholarship. Rather, he seeks to re-enchant literary studies as a whole by reclaiming the Biblical-studies roots of its hermeneutic past. LaPorte traces the origins of cultic Shakespeare and contemporary literary criticism to the appearance of Higher Criticism, which treated the Bible not as the direct word of God but as an ancient, possibly mythical text worthy of critical examination. In LaPorte's account, as Higher Criticism transformed the Bible from the factual word of God into the "inspired poetic expression" of God, "the most sublime secular poetry" showed promise "to become its own Bible, as well" (33). In light of the Higher Criticism, Shakespeare came to be seen as a Biblical supplement, a type of modern-day prophet. This move to make Shakespeare into something of a fifth Evangelist is evidenced through a trove of artifacts found from the mid-1800s on, most notably the proliferation of "Shakespeare sermons" and the appearance of Shakespearean devotional books, which mined Shakespeare's plays and sonnets for their possible theological and religious meanings. LaPorte's book is at its best and most illuminating in the first three chapters, wherein he explores these archival materials. Chapter 1 examines the "occasionally ridiculous, invariably quaint" Shakespeare sermons of the nineteenth century (24). These sermons treated Shakespeare's wisdom much like the Bible's: that is, as "timeless, universal, and divinely inspired" (29). These sermons had their heyday in the celebrations of Shakespeare's tercentenary, in 1864, and they proliferated both in the pulpit and in published pamphlets. They looked to Shakespeare's plots and his characters' words to reveal truths about sin, temptation, and corruption, topics that could be placed within the framework of a larger Christian discourse. If the Shakespeare sermons connected Shakespearean wisdom to Biblical wisdom, then the appearance of devotional Shakespeare volumes, the subject of chapters 2 and 3, flat-out conflated them. These volumes placed Shakespeare's work in dialogue with the Bible, often comparing individual phrases with analogous phrases from the holy book. While the Shakespeare sermons often pulled religious meaning out of Shakespeare's themes, these [End Page 132] printed devotional works moved beyond thematic meaning and instead focused on exact words or phrases and their supposed Biblical counterparts. This direct comparison was indicated not simply by their content, but also by their mise-en-page, wherein Shakespeare's words were placed on facing pages to the Bible's, often in matching fonts. LaPorte argues that these devotional texts became a sort of "secondary Bible, showing divine wisdom refracted through English genius" (64). These cuttings and juxtapositions were often absurd in the context of the plays themselves and could only be examined for wisdom when removed from the intricacies of Shakespeare's plots. LaPorte argues that these compilers frequently exhibited a "sublime indifference to literary contexts" (84), with Victorian scholars drawing ostensibly meaningful moral lessons from Shakespearean villains and clowns. Such creative interpretations oftentimes went far beyond the confines of the text, and LaPorte draws our attention to other such instances of "hermeneutic extravagance...

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian reviewSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207