MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fairy Tales and Folklore

2023· reference-entry· en· W4377820675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFolkloreGeorge (robot)LiteratureVictorian literatureArtCharacter (mathematics)Plot (graphics)HistoryPoetryArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fairy tales and folklore pervaded Victorian society. Fairy tales and folktales were rewritten and revised, translated, edited and collected, and illustrated, and their characters and motifs were found in art, literature, and science alike. The second half of the 19th century saw a dramatic rise in the publication of literary fairy tales, and folklorists collected and classified folktales. These publications appeared in various forms, climaxing with the folklorists Joseph Jacobs’s English Fairy Tales (1890) and Andrew Lang’s fairy books, published from 1889 to 1910, which gathered fairy tales and folktales from all over the world. Authors such as Lewis Carroll, Dinah Mulock Craik, Charles Dickens, Juliana Horatia Ewing, Laurence Housman, May Kendall, Charles Kingsley, George MacDonald, Louisa Molesworth, Mary de Morgan, Christina Rossetti, John Ruskin, William Makepeace Thackeray, Oscar Wilde, J. M. Barrie, Edith Nesbit, and William Butler Yeats wrote literary fairy tales. Fairy tales and folklore also informed Victorian fiction: references to supernatural creatures, such as changelings, fairies, elves, and gnomes, continued to be made in Victorian novels, which used character types, conventions, and plot patterns directly borrowed from classic fairy tales and folklore, as in the novels of Charlotte and Emily Brontë, Charles Dickens, George Eliot, and Thomas Hardy. The 1860s sensation novels, such as Mary Elizabeth Braddon’s Lady Audley’s Secret (1862), and fin-de-siècle gothic fiction, such as Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897), used references to fairy tales to probe gender relationships and investigate woman’s identity and the nature of female sexuality. This was also the case in fairy ballets, operas, and fairy plays or “extravaganzas,” which showcased more and more technologically complex and sensational magical transformations. At the same time, however, fairy tales and folktales were increasingly designed for juvenile audiences in the course of the 19th century. The publication of Edgar Taylor’s translation of the Grimm brothers’ fairy tales in 1823, published as German Popular Stories and illustrated by George Cruikshank, suggested that fairy tales were accepted in the nursery and paved the way for many Victorian collections of folktales and fairy tales aimed at young readers. Fairy tales were also used throughout the Victorian period to express anxieties or mediate knowledge, as in the case of popular science works. Although ballads, tales, legends, and myths had been collected and examined for over a century, leading to the development of taxonomies and indexes as in cabinets of natural history, late-Victorian anthropologists’ and ethnographers’ approach to fairy tales and folktales illuminated the period’s search for origins—the origins of fairies and those of human nature. The protean nature of fairy tales and folklore generally served to bridge the gap between old and new visions of the world: folktales and fairy tales could praise science and technology and map out new scientific methods; they could deal with the spiritual, belief, and faith; and they could even propose new definitions of humans—and particularly of women.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207