No Such Thing as Bad Publicity?: Confirmation of John Hampson’s Book Thieving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a moment, John Hampson Simpson (1901–1955) looked set to be one of the stars of working-class Modernism, and perhaps if he had been more open about his past, he would have been. Published as the work of simply John Hampson, his first novel Saturday Night at the Greyhound (1931) was one of the Hogarth Press’s smash hits, selling 3,000 copies, not quite in the company of Virginia Woolf’s own best-selling The Waves (1931, 10,000 copies), but an impressive debut.1Saturday Night at the Greyhound went on to sell 80,000 more copies after Penguin reprinted it in 1937,2 but Hampson’s second work O Providence (1932) failed to reach the same heights for the Woolfs. In turn, the Hogarth Press ‘likely guided by the market, as well as by the quality of Hampson’s writing’, did not publish Hampson’s later novels.3 Although he was able to place later works at houses of varying prestige, and contribute to John Lehmann’s The Penguin New Writing series in the 1940s, among other publishing activities, he is mainly remembered today as a one-hit wonder. Perhaps he could have found a place in the canon next to his friends, acquaintances, and idols––such as E. M Forster, W. H. Auden, and the Woolfs, respectively––if he had only conquered the fear that his past as a convicted and incarcerated book-thief would catch up to him.
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 | 0.005 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.005 |
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".