Dark Stories: Poet-Audience Relations and the Journey Underground in Margaret Atwood’s The Door and Other Works
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The depiction of the underground journey, being more suggestive of a continuous process of exploration than it is of a transition from one discrete state to another, tempers the uneasy separation that Margaret Atwood often attempts to envision between normal and creative consciousness. Atwood has referred to Northrop Frye’s connections between the unconscious mind and the creative imagination – that “there may be imaginative rewards not afforded by the waking consciousness.” Knowledge gained in unseen realms may be a matter of moving through the darkness: continuously inhabiting both the past and the present at all times. By casting the poetic project as a voyage into a dark underworld – a voyage all people take in one form or another – the poems in The Door develop a subtle yet important case for complicating normative understandings of the poet and the audience. In doing so, they problematize the assumption that there can be a clear distinction between the two.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".