MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398226633 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2023.a927883

The Lady's Magazine (1770–1832) and the Making of Literary History by Jennie Batchelor (review)

2023· article· en· W4398226633 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Astrid Dröse

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Lady's Magazine (1770–1832) and the Making of Literary History by Jennie Batchelor Astrid Dröse (bio) Jennie Batchelor, The Lady's Magazine (1770–1832) and the Making of Literary History ( Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2002), pp. 320, $120/£85 cloth, open-access e-book. Jennie Batchelor's monograph concerns a principal periodical of the late eighteen and early nineteenth century: the Lady's Magazine. "The first recognisable modern women's magazine" was published monthly from 1770 until 1847, ran to over 750 monthly issues, and circulated about 15,000 copies at its peak (3). Women's periodicals have long been considered aesthetically inferior, unintellectual, ephemeral testimonies of an amateur culture. Batchelor argues that "the Lady's Magazine can, indeed, persuasively write back to a literary history that has traditionally marginalised it on the grounds of its unapologetic popularity and its association with women's reading pleasure" (3). Batchelor presents a magisterial book that, for the first time, addresses a hitherto neglected field of literary history around 1800 and challenges established narratives. She alternates detective work with large historical arcs to describe the eventful history of the Lady's Magazine from the exciting founding phase in 1770 to 1832, the year in which the Robinson publishing house ceased publication. The book's six main chapters treat the Lady's Magazine's origins, beginnings, content, authors and readers, rivalries and changes, and literary historical significance. Batchelor begins with a letter from Charlotte Brontë to Hartley Coleridge from 1840, in which Brontë reports on her reading of the Lady's Magazine in her youth. The letter illustrates the ambivalence that characterised the view of this journal in the mid-nineteenth century. On the one hand, the Lady's Magazine seemed old fashioned, as if it had [End Page 508] fallen out of time in the modern Victorian literary system; on the other hand, for Brontë it virtually symbolised the emancipation of female reading and writing. The first chapter places the Lady's Magazine in the history of women's journals in the Age of Enlightenment, such as the Ladies' Mercury, the Lady's Museum, or the Female Specator. The aim of all these projects was "to promote women's reading, women's writing and women's literary history" (41). The Lady's Magazine followed on from these projects but also found its own paths from the beginning. The second chapter tells the magazine's turbulent founding story: it was essentially shaped by the competition of important players in the London book market, which took place in Paternoster Row, in the centre of the London publishing trade. As early as 1771, John Coote sold the new journal, which addressed the fair sex after the successful model of the Gentlemen's Magazine (founded in 1731), to the booksellers George Robinson (the so-called "king of the Row") and John Roberts. Coote's cofounder, John Wheble, did not accept the deal and continued to print a journal under the name of the sold project. This competition led to innovation pressure and accelerated brand consolidation. Robert and Robertson emerged victorious from a court case at the end of 1772, the sources of which (trial transcripts) Batchelor evaluates for the first time. This publisher team determined the great success of the magazine for decades. Crucial to this success was the miscellany format, which offered readers (who certainly included men) the optimal combination of education and entertainment with a heterogeneous mix of popular topics, such as education, Gothic storytelling, oriental tales, and travel writing. Translations also played a major role, especially moral tales from French but also from German and Italian. The "unfixing of genre" and other effects of presentation such as seriality and juxtapositions of different texts created new possibilities for reception (82). Thus, the editors succeeded in what Batchelor, drawing on Jon P. Klancher's work, describes as audience-building. Batchelor presents the volume and variety of texts through cleverly chosen case studies that shed light on topics of the magazine. For example, the theme of slavery and abolition plays a major role around 1800. The brutal drama The Negro Slaves (1796) by the German author August von Kotzebue appears (in translation...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207