Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is such a pleasure to address an audience openly celebrating children's literature, where no one is ashamed of delighting in children's stories, and where no one wishes to ha ve grown-up covers for children's books, as though reading children's literature is a slightly dirty habit that must be hidden at all costs.I also write adult fiction, under a pseudonym Rachna Mara.My one collection of adult short fiction, Of Customs and Excise, came out in 1991.When I meet with other writers, particularly those who write adult fiction but not children's stories, I almost inevitably get probed, either directly or obliquely, as to why it's been so long since I wrote adult fiction.Some people go for the flattering approach: "I hope you're not going to give up writing adult fiction, Rachna.I'd love to see what else you could write-a novel maybe?Of course," they continue, "I know you've been writing children's stories, and I know there have been some awards and well..." Often, at this point they trail off before rushing on, "Not that children's writing isn't important, but, it's just, well, your collection of short stories was so good."No one has come right out with it, but what they're thinking is: when are you going back to the stuff that matters?When are you going back to the Grown-up stuff?Yes, yes, we know children's writing is necessary, but all those picture books, well, anyone can dash them off and so...But children's literature is so much more than a lower or less-skilled or less-insightful version of adult fiction.We know this because if we are asked to remember books that resonate within us, we almost always come up with some titles that we have read as children.The impact of children's fiction, of books we read as children, reverberates through our lives far more than the books we read as adults.I certainly do not consider writing for children a lesser form of my art.The process of creating is the same, whether it's writing for children or adults.It seems to me that as writers, we are co-ordinators of images, directing the mind towards a new way of looking at a particular situation in life.We examine the plethora of images, experiences, ideas, thoughts, feelings and dreams in our lives-the whole mess and mass of them that swirl and flow disconnectedly in the untidy way that life works-and we select certain ones, linking them to tell a tale.We juxtapose them in new ways, weaving strands of seemingly unconnected images from far and wide to say: look do you see how it works?Did you think of it this way?For me, personally, to begin any piece of writing is an act of faith.I have to trust the links my
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".