Lucrece and Brutus: Glory in the Land of Tender ed. by Madeleine de Scudéry (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Lucrece and Brutus: Glory in the Land of Tender ed. by Madeleine de Scudéry Anne E. Duggan Madeleine de Scudéry, Lucrece and Brutus: Glory in the Land of Tender, ed. and trans. Sharon Diane Nell (Toronto: Iter, 2022). Pp. 365; 1 map. $60.95 paper. While many early modern scholars and teachers are aware of Madeleine de Scudéry's second roman à fleuve, Clélie, Histoire Romaine (1654–1660), and the Map of the Land of Tender embedded within it, they may be less familiar with the novel's representation of the story of Lucretia. As Sharon Diane Nell's critical edition and translation of the story of Lucrece and Brutus makes clear, this secondary story is foundational to the novel itself in the way that it supports the novel's progression from captivity—Rome, Brutus's reason, and Clelie are captives of Tarquin's tyranny—towards freedom. The edition also richly weaves the text within Scudéry's lifelong engagement in exploring the figure of Lucretia and the notions of friendship, love, and glory. Lucrece and Brutus: Glory in the Land of Tender is required reading for anyone interested in understanding the complexity of Scudéry's literary talents and philosophical ideas. The critical edition provides material for the uninitiated as well as the expert to explore the centrality of the story of Lucrece and Brutus within the larger framework of Clélie, a novel that is framed by the trials and tribulations of Clelie and her beloved, Aronce, within the context of Roman history and the establishment of the first Roman Republic. In the introduction, Nell initiates readers into the world of seventeenth-century salons and Scudéry's place within it, providing the romancière's biography and presenting her important legacy that is often not adequately accounted for. Nell traces the influences of Scudéry on Marie-Madeleine de La Fayette's The Princess of Cleves (1678), notably the garden scenes with the Duc de Nemours; Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve's Belle et la Bête (1740), where the Beast's magically inspired stupidity recalls Brutus's feigned stupidity; Jacques Rochette de la Morlière's Angola (1746); Jean-Jacques Rousseau; and François-René de Chateaubriand, among others. Nell foregrounds the connections between salon culture and Scudéry's oeuvre, and how Scudéry's text fits into and engages with the literary field of seventeenth-century France with respect to representations of women, preciosity, and the backlash against preciosity by the likes of Nicolas Boileau, Molière, Tallemant des Réaux, and Michel de Pure. The introduction also provides a nice overview of Scudéry reception and criticism. Nell first shows how nineteenth-century literary historians like Charles Augustin Sainte-Beuve and Victor Cousin based their knowledge about Scudéry's salon and oeuvre on the works of her detractors. Such a move denigrates the activities—the seriousness—of her salon and the literary value of her texts, which amounts to writing her out of literary history. Nell then focuses on the reassessment of her legacy, which began in the 1970s, by scholars like Dorothy Backer, Carolyn Lougee, and Ian Maclean, stretching into the 1990s and early 2000s with Joan DeJean, Linda Timmermans, and Faith Beasley. The rest of the volume consists of introductions to relevant excerpts (within and outside of Clélie) that support our understanding of the story of Lucrece and Brutus, including Scudéry's longtime interest in the figure of Lucretia. The story itself is quite lengthy—some 200 pages—and includes Nell's introductions to different parts of the narrative that provide context and a framework for reading. This organization works tremendously well in supplying sufficient context for helping [End Page 400] the reader understand the relation, for instance, between the Map of the Land of Tender, which Clelie generated for her friends, and the events surrounding the story of Lucrece. The excerpted texts follow the chronology of Scudéry's publications, showing readers the evolution of her ideas on the figure of Lucretia and on themes such as glory, love, and friendship. Before moving to Clélie, Nell provides two excerpts from Scud...
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".