MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2063489959 · doi:10.1353/nar.0.0035

Hairball Speaks: Margaret Atwood and the Narrative Legacy of the Female Grotesque

2010· article· en· W2063489959 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yael Shapira

Notice bibliographique

RevueNarrative · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeAdventureLiteratureHistorySubject (documents)Art historyArtPsychoanalysisPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Hairball Speaks: Margaret Atwood and the Narrative Legacy of the Female Grotesque Yael Shapira (bio) These were two of the adventures of my professional life. The first—killing the Angel in the House—I solved. She died. But the second, telling the truth about my own experiences as a body, I do not think I solved. I doubt that any woman has solved it yet. Virginia Woolf, "Professions for Women" (153)1 "On the thirteenth of November, day of unluck, month of the dead, Kat went into the Toronto General Hospital for an operation. It was for an ovarian cyst, a large one." So begins Margaret Atwood's short story "Hairball," whose title mirrors the name that Kat affectionately gives to the growth removed from her body. "She asked for a jar of formaldehyde," the narrator casually reports at the beginning of the story, "and put the cut-open tumour into it. It was hers, it was benign, it did not deserve to be thrown away. She took it back to her apartment and stuck it on the mantelpiece" (41, 42). Published in The New Yorker in 1990 and then included in Atwood's 1991 collection Wilderness Tips, "Hairball" is a remarkable short story that has received little critical attention to date.2 Part of the wave of late twentieth-century women's writing that sought to reclaim the female body as literary subject matter, the story has a powerful dimension of self-reflexivity, functioning as an ironic, insightful comment on the changing tradition to which it belongs. "Hairball" probes the still-powerful link between women's unstable, "disgusting" bodies and their violation of social norms—a link that, I argue below, has a specifically narrative history. Atwood is [End Page 51] here reviving a longstanding narrative formula that joins the "grotesque" female body to a story of women's misconduct to produce a cautionary tale about the dangers of female transgression. Using various components of narrative form, this paradigm of ideologically motivated storytelling "reads" the biological flux of the female body as symbolic of a dangerous disorder and exploits its repugnant effect to legitimize the containment or punishment of the transgressive woman. By interrogating, in a modern context, the narrative connection between women's "leaky" corporeality and their social defiance, "Hairball" questions the extent to which women's bodies and conduct, as well as the stories told about them, have truly been liberated from their old constraints. Atwood's narrative shows, moreover, that while the female grotesque used to be a pivotal component in the derogatory stories that patriarchal culture told about women, it can now also accommodate narratives about women's own experiences. The question of how the disorder inscribed in the female body should be read—what order, exactly, is being disrupted? Is this disruption a menace, or is it liberation? Should it be contained, silenced, hidden, embraced, flaunted, celebrated?—is posed in the story not only to the reader, but to Kat herself, and her interpretive dilemma reflects the crossroads reached by contemporary storytelling that takes the female body as its subject. I "In myth woman's boundaries are pliant, porous, mutable. . . . She swells, she shrinks, she leaks, she is penetrated, she suffers metamorphoses," writes Anne Carson of the female body's portrayal in classical antiquity (79). Similar representations of women's bodies appear in a range of narrative contexts over the centuries: a sixteenth- century manual for soldiers, eighteenth-century epistolary fiction, pornography, dirty jokes, and the Disney version of Cinderella.3 As the name "female grotesque" implies, scholarly discussion of this tradition grows out of a dialogue, at once admiring and critical, with Mikhail Bakhtin's influential concept of the grotesque body. For Bakhtin, the topsy-turvy rites of carnival are concretely manifested in the bodily aesthetic that he terms "grotesque realism": the carnival body is "a body in the act of becoming . . . never finished, never completed . . . continually built, created, and build[ing] and creat[ing] another body" (317) This image of the body—which foregrounds orifices and openings, ingress and egress, eating and digestion, birth and death—is defined through and against its antithesis, the statue-like classical ideal, "a strictly completed, finished...

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

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 candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
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 enseignants0,789
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

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 technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,218
Écart entre enseignants0,204 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNarrativeMême sujetUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionTravaux en français237 207