MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379623320 · doi:10.1353/mlr.2002.a828529

The Alchemy of Laughter: Comedy in English Fiction by Glen Cavaliero (review)

2002· article· en· W4379623320 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allan Ingram

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Modern Language Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComedyLaughterNothingComicsLiteratureArtTributeAlchemyJokeArt historyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MLR, 97.4, 2002 925 eloquent tribute to Scottish folk-song, not as the artless expression of some primitive innocence but as a modern form of giedd. University of Ottawa Andrew Taylor The Alchemy of Laughter: Comedy in English Fiction. By Glen Cavaliero. Basingstoke : Macmillan; New York: St Martin's Press. 2000. xi + 255 pp. ?42.50. The advantage of the The Alchemy of Laughter is its freedom to range over a wide field of English fictional comedy, reminding us of the familiar (especially of the comic greats, Fielding, Sterne, Austen, Dickens, Thackeray, whose work understandably receives the largest proportion of Glen Cavaliero's attention) and of the less remembered (such as Peacock, 'Saki', Oliphant, and the elder Powys broth? ers), and alerting us to the comic pleasures to be found in those now obscure originals who have escaped our attention, or who rarely feature in books written for an academic readership. The book was written, says Cavaliero, 'simply for the pleasure of it' (p. ix), and certainly his reading for it, and the act of writing it, will have been keenly pleasurable. The disadvantage of the book is that it has nothing to say. What is crippling about studies that span is their tendency to deal with all readers as beginners. 'The medium of Tristram Shandy is the narrator's consciousness: time is internalised, events are described not as they chronologically occur but as they surface in Tristram's mind' (p. 64). Yes, so it is, and so they are. 'Whereas the marriage of Jane to Bingley is between two fundamentally complaisant people who match each other, that between Elizabeth and Darcy is between two who complement each other' (p. 47). Absolutely. Admirers of Thomas Hardy will probably be admirers of Walter Scott; those of Jane Austen, of Henry James. And those who enjoy Trollope are likely to appreciate the work of Evelyn Waugh, even though the two writers differ drastically in several ways' (p. 109). Good to get that one sorted out. Not that Cavaliero confines himself to bland statements of the obvious. There is controversy here. Can it really be asserted, forexample, that the 'world' of Three Men in a Boat is 'classless' (p. 11)? Can we really consent to view 'the eighteenth-century Enlightenment' and 'nineteenth-century Romanticism' as encouragements to people on the path to the 'twentieth-century convictions as to the human right to spiritual autonomy and the importance ofachieving personal fulfilment' (p. 241)? Is it all, then, thateasy? There is also absurdity. Mansfield Park, while 'not formally a comedy', is 'none the less comedic in its import': its ironies, 'with their exposure of human self-deception, are all directed towards what is essentially a religious vision, one of a truth that can be apprehended behind appearances and which reconciles the opposites which irony connects and displays in its effortsto control them' (p. 92). Comedic, then, like OedipusRex and KingLear? A wider frame of discussion, surely,is called forhere, and for Tristram Shandy, too: 'By qualifying the distinction between author and reader, it subverts the monolithic status of the artefact as object' (p. 63). Indeed, Cavaliero further cripplingly burdens himself by a decision not only to present comedy as participating in the rebellion against 'the monolith's restrictive pressures' (p. 3), but also to saddle that metaphor with the 'alchemy' of his title: 'this monolithic prima materia is embodied in four principal human concerns' (these four are, apparently, the past, the present, the future, and timelessness) 'much as that of the mediaeval alchemists was madeup of the elements of water, fire,earthandair' (p. 3). Meanwhile, why is Evelyn Waugh confined, largely, to fivepages towards the end? How can 'only two' of Forster's novels 'in any sense be described as comedies' (p. 119)? Where 926 Reviews are Goldsmith, Somerset Maugham, Muriel Spark, and Iris Murdoch? Where is Chaucer? University of Northumbria at Newcastle Allan Ingram The Writer and Religion. Ed. by William H. Gass and Lorin Cuoco. (International Writers Center Series) Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. 2000. xiii+157 pp. $I9-95This volume has a more international scope than many books that might appear under the title 'The Writer and Religion'. It...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
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.

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Modern Language ReviewSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207