Bibliographic record
Abstract
What unites all his work is an attention to the way in which literary texts both illuminate and unsettle discursive patterns in disciplines that might seem more powerful (e.g. theology, economics, psychology, politics). Simpson on Simpson, 19981 This book honors the scholarship and, no less, the teaching of James Simpson, one of the most influential figures in medieval and early modern literary studies over the past half century, and perhaps the single figure who has come to represent the center of the field of late Middle English studies in the form it has taken over most of the past twenty-five years in particular. More specifically, it honors Simpson's signal commitment to the distinctive category of the literary. Over the past four decades, his energetic work has illuminated new intersections between literary and more dominant public discourses, while unsettling received hierarchies of power and disrupting intellectual systems centered on periodization, literalism, and liberalism, especially in relation to what he has taught us to call the Trans-Reformation period. At the heart of these interventions is always the transformative and thus central role of literature as agent and instigator, instrument and subject. Simpson's scholarship tests the boundaries of literary history, exposing tacit cultural structures and passive myths of cultural alterity. His contributions have profoundly shaped scholarship on late medieval literature, from nudging the canon to embrace John Gower, Thomas Hoccleve, and John Lydgate to influencing how an entire generation of students and scholars approaches William Langland's Piers Plowman . Meanwhile, the revisionist bent of Simpson's cultural narratives continues to dislocate the periodizing wedge that has long been driven between the medieval and the proto-modern. In turn, Simpson's hermeneutics of periodization and his polemical probing of the origin myths of modernity (e.g. humanism, liberalism, literalism, iconoclasm, and Protestant triumphalism) have opened up fruitful paths for thinking about literary and intellectual history over the longue durée . The book grew out of a conference held at Harvard University in the fall of 2022 to mark the occasion of Simpson's retirement from the Donald P. and Katherine B. Loker Professorship of English, which he held for almost twenty years, six of them as Department Chair.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.400 | 0.315 |
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".