MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7037616954

Escaping from allegories:cat’s eye and King Lear Escaping from allegories:cat’s eye and King Lear

2008· article· en· W7037616954 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueBotanical Studies and Applications
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeSymbol (formal)Identity (music)WonderColonialismReflection (computer programming)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In her 1972 study of Canadian literature, aptly titled Survival,
 Margaret Atwood uses the symbol of the mirror to describe the difficulty faced by Canadian writers and artists, struggling to assert their voices in a country trying to define itself against a colonial past.Here, she sees Canada as squeezed between the overwhelming, colonizing powers of Great Britain on one side, and The United States on the other. In her
 view, a piece of art becomes a mirror. As she writes:
 If a country or a culture lacks such mirrors it has no way of
 knowing what it looks like; it must travel blind. If, as has
 long been the case in [Canada], the viewer is given a mirror
 that reflects not him but someone else, and told at the same
 time that the reflection he sees is himself, he will get a very
 distorted idea of what he is really like. He will also get a
 distorted idea of what other people are like: it’s hard to find
 out who anyone else is until you have found out who you are.
 (15-16)
 With its roots in Lacanian psychoanalysis, the mirror Atwood
 describes provides an unreliable reflection for burgeoning artists inCanada: up against the powerful countries that surround them she sees a major identity crisis. Sixteen years later, her 1988 novel, Cat’s Eye, treads similar ground, tracking as it does the passage of its protagonist—painter, Elaine Risley—through childhood in mid-century Canada to
 her development as an established artist in the 1980s. It is into this narrative that Atwood places extensive references to Shakespeare’s tragedy, King Lear—a play that deals with the notion of identity. Here, Lear’s question, “Who is it that can tell me who I am?” becomes Elaine’s, as she ventures back to Toronto to attend a retrospective of her work at a women’s art gallery named “Sub-Versions.” In her 1972 study of Canadian literature, aptly titled Survival,
 Margaret Atwood uses the symbol of the mirror to describe the difficulty faced by Canadian writers and artists, struggling to assert their voices in a country trying to define itself against a colonial past.Here, she sees Canada as squeezed between the overwhelming, colonizing powers of Great Britain on one side, and The United States on the other. In her
 view, a piece of art becomes a mirror. As she writes:
 If a country or a culture lacks such mirrors it has no way of
 knowing what it looks like; it must travel blind. If, as has
 long been the case in [Canada], the viewer is given a mirror
 that reflects not him but someone else, and told at the same
 time that the reflection he sees is himself, he will get a very
 distorted idea of what he is really like. He will also get a
 distorted idea of what other people are like: it’s hard to find
 out who anyone else is until you have found out who you are.
 (15-16)
 With its roots in Lacanian psychoanalysis, the mirror Atwood
 describes provides an unreliable reflection for burgeoning artists inCanada: up against the powerful countries that surround them she sees a major identity crisis. Sixteen years later, her 1988 novel, Cat’s Eye, treads similar ground, tracking as it does the passage of its protagonist—painter, Elaine Risley—through childhood in mid-century Canada to
 her development as an established artist in the 1980s. It is into this narrative that Atwood places extensive references to Shakespeare’s tragedy, King Lear—a play that deals with the notion of identity. Here, Lear’s question, “Who is it that can tell me who I am?” becomes Elaine’s, as she ventures back to Toronto to attend a retrospective of her work at a women’s art gallery named “Sub-Versions.”

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)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Communication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,389
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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 Opus0,239
Tête enseignante GPT0,465
Écart entre enseignants0,226 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Même sujetBotanical Studies and ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207