Critical Reception and Postmodern Violation of Generic Conventions in Jacques Brossard’s "Monument aux marges": L’Oiseau de feu
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quebec writer Jacques-Edmond Brossard's 1989 novel, L'oiseau de feu-1. Les annees d'apprentissage , first of the five-part Oiseau series, created a literary sensation as a potential of la science-fiction quebecoise . Despite critical approbation, however, few readers endeavour beyond the series' first instalment, and the whole stands at the margins of the field both for readers and scholars. In part, the difficulty of identifying Brossard as primarily a mainstream or a science-fiction writer has estranged fans and critics of both camps. But more importantly, his series' ludic irreverence toward and self-conscious play with generic conventions – one of its many postmodern features – works against its long-term engagement of quebecois/French-Canadian critics in both the mainstream and the genre milieux. Yet, this monument aux marges deserves more attention precisely because of its postmodernism.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".