MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408139122 · doi:10.1093/alh/ajae135

“Withersoever We Turn Our Eyes”: Reimagining Democratic Writing in Nineteenth-Century Print Culture

2025· article· en· W4408139122 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Tomc

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Literary History · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyTurn (biochemistry)Print cultureArtLiteratureHistoryAestheticsPolitical scienceLawPoliticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This essay studies three books on nineteenth-century US print culture: D. Berton Emerson’s American Literary Misfits: The Alternative Democracies of Mid-Nineteenth-Century Print Cultures (2024), Bryan Sinche’s Published by the Author: Self-Publication in Nineteenth-Century African American Literature (2024), and Susan J. Stanfield’s Rewriting Citizenship: Women, Race, and Nineteenth-Century Print Culture (2022). Examining print micro-cultures, from self-published sermons to obscure urban novels and pamphlets promoting true womanhood among Black men and women, these scholars invest in hope. They take for granted that democracy in some form will flourish in US local cultures and among the common people despite whatever political direction the US nation state itself might be taking. From where does this faith in the inevitable presence of democracy on US soil descend? This essay suggests that scholars remain unconsciously indebted to nineteenth-century providential histories that depicted the US as an originator and avatar of modern democratic revolutions. Working with the assumption that the US at any given moment must be germinating a more just future, these scholars are able to locate insipient democracy in surprising texts. Their hopefulness connects them to a long line of nineteenth-century cultural theorists who believed that US popular and marginal cultures will produce the voices of the democratic future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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 venueAmerican Literary HistorySame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207