MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407406123 · doi:10.1080/24692921.2025.2460952

The queer communism of Sylvia Townsend Warner’s Spanish Civil War love poems

2025· article· en· W4407406123 on OpenAlexaff
Jesse Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminist Modernist Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSpanish History and Politics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTownsendPoetryQueerSpanish Civil WarCommunismLiteratureArtGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLawPoliticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article theorizes how Sylvia Townsend Warner’s collection of 1936 Spanish Civil War (SCW) sapphic-modernist love poems imagines sexual and political liberation. Warner develops in her speaker a dually queer and communist perspective. The speaker rejects normative and reproductive logics in favour of distinctly queer logics. In doing so, Warner anticipates two longstanding conflicts in queer scholarship: queer historiography and the gaps in the historical record, and queer theorists’ tendency to critique the state but not offer an alternative vision. Warner imagines these conflicts as epistemic injustices that deny queer people an interpretive framework to understand their lives by severing them from their history and denying them a queer form of governance. With a focus on poems four and six, I argue queer time, messianic time, and Jean-Luc Nancy’s “being singular plural” are employed as representational strategies for imagining liberation from these epistemic injustices. This article makes a vital contribution to the study of Warner’s oeuvre and of sapphic modernism by articulating a queer and communist epistemology that foregrounds proximity, longing, and love.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFeminist Modernist StudiesSame topicSpanish History and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207