Transatlantic Reprinting and the Authorizing Efforts of British Publishers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT DeSpain reviews The Transatlantic Materials of American Literature: Publishing US Writing in Britain, 1830–1860 by Katie McGettigan, published by University of Massachusetts Press. McGettigan’s book builds upon the foundational work of Meredith McGill’s American Literature and the Culture of Reprinting (2003) to argue that British publishers helped expand the scope and audience for American literature by creating editions of American authors’ works that lent them greater credibility. McGettigan’s study offers in-depth case studies of British editions of hallmark American authors, including Longfellow, Poe, Melville, and Lydia Huntley Sigourney. Drawing on a comprehensive body of research into publishers’ circulars, advertisements, and archives, McGettigan covers multiple media forms, including deluxe editions, the cheap series, the gift book, and the magazine. DeSpain argues McGettigan’s book is an important contribution that reimagines the scholarly narrative about transatlantic reprinting as one of collaboration rather than contest. McGettigan’s most important contribution is her extensive analysis of how the cheap series created a greater global context for literature, which will prove fruitful for new scholarship about the distribution and reception of the cheap series.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it