MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7081104675 · doi:10.17863/cam.121285

On Combustion: Contemporary British Poetry and the Pyrocene (1990-2017)

2025· dissertation· en· W7081104675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueApollo (University of Cambridge) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryScrutinyCriticismReading (process)AnthropocenePoliticsOrder (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proposed by the environmental historian Stephen J. Pyne, the term Pyrocene ‘renames and redefines the Anthropocene according to humanity’s primary ecological signature, which is our ability to manipulate fire.’ This thesis draws on Pyne’s ‘Pyrocene’ in order to examine the defining roles of combustion, flame, and fire across a range of contemporary works of experimental British poetry in the period 1990-2017 (particularly those arising from the so-called ‘Cambridge School’). It argues that this body of texts proves exceptionally sensitive to registering and evaluating the cultural traces left by environmental crisis at large, and the Pyrocene in particular, and—also—that this poetry shows itself capable of challenging and developing Pyne’s bio-chemical account of the Pyrocene in new political and ethical directions. A detailed introduction begins by recovering ‘combustion’ from its dispersal across several disciplines and discourses in order to establish, as it were, a contemporary-historical dimension to the process. A case is made for 1990 as a plausible start-date for the current Pyrocene (marked by the predictive modelling of the Kuwaiti oil fires at the 1990 World Climate Conference), while the period surveyed concludes with the Fort McMurray Fire of 2016-17, which consumed a Canadian city dedicated to maximising fossil-fuel extraction from the Albertan tar-sands. This introduction concludes by detailing the specific poetic tradition under scrutiny in the thesis, as well as the forms of reading and criticism which such writing has tended to invite. Having established these contexts, this thesis then undertakes three major case studies across three main chapters, each dedicated primarily to reading a single collection by a single poet: consecutively, Andrea Brady’s Wildfire (2010); Rosa van Hensbergen’s In Accident & Emergence (2015); and Dan Eltringham’s Cairn Almanac (2017). It adopts a methodology of ‘extreme’ close reading throughout; not—as the eco-critic Timothy Clark (and others) have argued—because this method is particularly appropriate to an age of environmental polycrisis, but rather because it is particularly appropriate to the works in question. These readings therefore unfold at an ultra-detailed level of inspection—dwelling on the allusions, references, and formal properties of each collection—while also attending to the way in which the conceptual profile of combustion develops over their courses. These hyper-local readings nevertheless allow the thesis to advance a broader argument concerning the conceptual and formal stakes of combustion for contemporary culture. Each chapter also seeks to excavate planetary-scale thematic preoccupations—among them the geo-political stakes of combustive material; combustion’s relation to states of emergency; and the effects of combustion upon climate—thereby allowing the thesis to expand its range outwards to involve other works of art and literature, from Werner Herzog’s 1992 film Lessons of Darkness to John Kinsella’s 2016 collection Firebreaks. Together, these analyses enable this thesis’s central and concluding claim: that scenes and tropes of combustion recur within contemporary experimental poetry not only as sites for examining the recent history and politics of the fossil fuel industry, but also as means of comprehending aspects of the subjective experience of what might be thought of as ‘the everyday Pyrocene.’

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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.

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 venueApollo (University of Cambridge)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207