Photo-Feminists: The Inter-textual Discussion of Eighteenth-Century Periodical Frontispieces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The visual afterlife of the two frontispieces from the first volume of Eliza Haywood’s periodical, The Female Spectator (1744-46) promotes the argument that middling women should be allowed to learn the same proto-disciplinary topics that men studied by representing how women could include both amusements and informal learning in between their duties as wives and mothers. The Female Spectator’s frontispiece, the emblem to Frances Brooke’s The Old Maid (1755-56), the frontispiece to Charlotte Lennox’s The Lady’s Museum (1760-61) and the 1789 frontispiece to The Lady’s Magazine (1770-1847) have the common element of the image of Minerva to visually continue the debate of female knowledge. Each image not only responds to the Female Spectator’s depiction of women learning, but also builds on the previous periodical’s visual response with time specific portrayals of the changes in balancing distractions with informal education. Analyzing the visual representations of women learning within the context of Michael Warner’s argument on the developing overlapping publics and counterpublics in the eighteenth century, and Tita Chico’s argument on the coquet figure reforming through proto-disciplinary knowledge, brings attention to the changing notion that middle-class women did not have the interest, access, and capability to learn proto-disciplinary knowledge. This paper concludes that the progression of the images represents the development and gradual acceptance of women’s informal education through the visual and textual representations of women studying natural philosophy, ancient history and moral philosophy in the frontispieces. Thus, Haywood’s periodical acts as a catalyst for subsequent periodicalists’ debates on women’s education.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".