MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518613782

The Problem of Eros in Tahar Ben Jelloun's The Sand Child

2011· article· en· W1518613782 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aparna Halpé

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian review of comparative literature · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterary Analysis and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpossibilityFreudian slipNarrativeSubjectivitySurpriseOrder (exchange)PsychoanalysisPluralLiteraturePseudonymPhilosophySociologyAestheticsPsychologyArtEpistemologyLinguisticsLawTheologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Your story is terrifying. You yourself are the secret that possesses me. I can free myself of it only by pressing on to the story's very end. But what will I find then? You are not the type to end a story. You're more the type to leave it open, in order to make it an endless tale. 1 These words, spoken by the lover of the unambiguously female Zahra of Ben Jelloun's The Sacred Night, bring back the central issue of The Sand Child—the impossibility of ending the plural narrations that surround the protagonist Ahmed/Zahra. 2 Ahmed/Zahra, whose doubled naming reflects both the span of the alphabet and the impossibility of a split androgyne, is a woman who has been gendered male in order to fulfill the perverse desire of a patriarch to beget a son. As such, he/she inhabits a narrative space that reflects the violent conflict between the containment of paternal signification and the disruption of the body. Given Ben Jelloun's sustained interest in psychoanalysis and the theories of Freud, it comes as no surprise that The Sand Child explores the issue of gendered subjectivity through a primarily Freudian paradigm. The novel negotiates the complex question of Woman, a question that was of central importance to

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.017
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian review of comparative literatureSame topicLiterary Analysis and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207