Art, Medicine, and Femininity: Visualising the Morphine Addict in Paris, 1870-1914
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against the backdrop of fin-de-siècle France, Hannah Halliwell presents a meticulous study of feminised visual morphine addict(ion) at the intersection of art, medicine and femininity from 1870 to 1914. The book ambitiously covers many fronts through the prism of art history, ranging across topics as diverse as art, femininity, medicine and gender. It foregrounds the forces of contemporaneous anxieties and social changes, all implicated in the symbolist milieu of decadence embedded in the visual, artistic representation of female morphine addict(ion), both facilitating and constructing its fin-de-siècle visual culture. As such, the book charts a social constructionist visualisation of addict(ion) peppered with unreliability and issues in late nineteenth-century France. Chapter 1 focuses on Georges Moreau de Tours’ painting La Morphine, illustrating its blend of sensational journalism, artistic freedom and medical knowledge, which sets a precedent for the depiction and visualisation of morphinomanie (morphine addiction). Chapter 2 discusses recurring artistic tropes that reflect anxieties about women’s changing identities, linking them to medical and artistic sources. Chapter 3 explores the feminisation of morphine, morphinomane (morphine addict), and its paraphernalia, portraying addiction as a neurotic, contagious disease. Chapter 4 examines the absence of male figures in these artworks, suggesting this absence as a critique of fin-de-siècle physicians.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.001 |
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".