Bibliographic record
Abstract
Janice Niemann, “Sex in the Summer-House: Setting in Victorian Pornography” (pp. 42–69) Despite scholarship on the history and publication of pornography, on laws surrounding Victorian pornography, and on pornography’s mutually informative relationship with nineteenth-century medical texts, actual Victorian pornographic texts remain relatively understudied. Taking up Lisa Sigel’s call to action that specific “motifs in nineteenth-century pornography deserve closer study,” and responding to previous scholars who have identified setting in Victorian pornography as largely inconsequential, I suggest that certain settings have significant literary impacts in Victorian pornography. Adopting the summer-house as a test case in three Victorian pornographic texts—The Romance of Lust (1873–76), Venus in India (1889), and Lovely Nights of Young Girls (c. 1895)—I investigate specific moments of sex in the summer-house, arguing that the liminality of summer-house settings facilitates character behavior and genre performance being pushed to their own liminal boundaries. Ultimately, I posit that the literary summer-house is a recognizable trope in Victorian pornography, and one that asks us to reexamine the impact of specific settings in the genre. Note: this paper discusses underage sex, incest, and rape.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".