MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2030034384 · doi:10.1353/mfs.2004.0024

Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial (review)

2004· article· en· W2030034384 sur OpenAlex
Brett Cooke

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueModern fiction studies · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDystopiaLiteratureHistoryPoliticsArtLawPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial Brett Cooke Erika Gottlieb. Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial. Montreal: McGill-Queen's UP, 2001. x + 323. In her monumental study of major dystopian works, Erika Gottlieb focuses almost exclusively on the intentional miscarriage of justice in the societies depicted, all supposedly created to effect a moral social harmony. She uses trials to juxtapose and compare speculative fiction by Western writers, who either imagined in advance possible and malign political structures in America or Britain or reflected on contemporary Soviet and Nazi regimes, with texts by writers having direct experience in dystopia. Thus, well-known novels by Zamiatin, Huxley, and Orwell, complemented by others by Atwood, Vonnegut, and Bradbury, serve as benchmarks for works by Voinovich, Aksyonov, Daniel, and Zinoviev. While dystopia is usually seen as a speculative genre, dealing with the future as part of science fiction, Gottlieb examines realist texts by Serge, Rodionov, Sinyavski, Ribakov, Koestler, and Grossman about recent events. Then she takes her comparison into a third dimension with an analysis of dystopian literature by a number of postwar Polish, Czech, and Hungarian writers. Gottlieb notes that Western dystopias anticipate important features of Soviet Bloc despotism: arbitrary law behind a legal facade, the promulgation of intentional injustice, and show trials. Nineteenth-century projections, as in Imre Madach's Tragedy of Man, of the replacement of religion with utopian thought certainly came to pass. However, beginning with Orwell, the purportedly just rationale for [End Page 534] social engineering is stripped away, revealing a naked grasp on power for the sake of power. She shows how Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty Four are written about the USSR, noting how the regimentation of the society by a tiny elite, in effect, made prisoners of the entire populace. In Orwell's case, this was intended to end Western adulation of Stalin. Later North American dystopias were, of course, well-informed about the crimes committed in the name of utopia. Though they show how "it could happen here," they develop relatively minor facets of dystopia. Gottlieb reads Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 as a reaction to McCarthyism and the threat of media culture. In Vonnegut's Player Piano, the mechanization of labor is so thorough as to make human beings superfluous. Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale points to danger from the religious right. Such dystopian futures are the consequences of our collective failure to take preventive action; this, after all, is agitational literature, but such threats hardly concern us much today. In Gottlieb's view, dystopian fiction written in actual dystopia is different. The writers are exposed to danger; several were purged or imprisoned as a direct result of their works. They focus on the immediate consequences of social engineering: atrocities. Some novels take the point of view of a Chekist carrying out "revolutionary justice" of an arbitrary nature. With time, increasing attention is paid to the chaos and confusion resulting from the violence. A central question for Gottlieb is why true believers, whether in the infamous show trials or in Koestler's Darkness at Noon, incriminate themselves. In her discussion of Grossman's Life and Fate, Gottlieb highlights the similarity of Nazi and Soviet totalitarianism, of the war with the "peace" that follows, between life in the Gulag and outside, and wonders what one was to fight for. Further psychological damage of "revolutionary justice" comes to light in later East European works in the form of increasing absurdity as writers apparently adapt to dystopia. Not only is no one safe from persecution, citizens in their dystopias feel a need for oppression. The show trials provide a model for theatrical black humor. Violence gives way to grotesque absurdity: space is given to bureaucratic doubletalk and yet more arbitrary persecution, as the "fury of terror is followed by the apathy of disintegration" (240). Covering this massive literature with consistent insight, Gottlieb makes but few missteps. She stretches dystopian literature to include realism about contemporary conditions, discusses Zamiatin with Western writers, and pursues an argument that Orwell was paving the way for "democratic socialism," which is vestigial. Her "trial" often amounts to a nonformal confrontation...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,931
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,549

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,092
Tête enseignante GPT0,279
Écart entre enseignants0,187 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle