MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1788396741 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v5n2p25

Castration Anxiety and the Mirror Stage: A Psychoanalytic Reading of Shakespeare's Othello

2015· article· en· W1788396741 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shadi Neimneh, Nisreen M. Sawwa

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWifeTragedy (event)Psychoanalytic theoryPsychoanalysisReading (process)LiteratureRank (graph theory)AnxietyPsychologyPhilosophyArtTheologyLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article mainly applies two psychoanalytic notions to Shakespeare's tragedy Othello (1622), namely castration anxiety and the mirror stage. It argues that Othello is strengthened by Desdemona and his high military rank as the general of the Venetian army. Against common postcolonial readings of the play, we argue that Othello experiences castration anxiety metaphorically, i.e. he gets anxious about losing such things that make him strong in Venice. In addition, Othello goes through the mirror stage metaphorically as well. He makes the assumptions that he is backed up by his military rank and his wife, that Iago is honest with him, and that the absence of the handkerchief—which signifies loyalty to him—indicates that his wife is unfaithful to him. After he believes Iago's lie that his wife has an affair with Cassio, Othello gets so anxious that he kills his wife, and after realizing that his assumptions have been all false and that he is castrated and no longer attached to his wife and his post, he self-destructively commits suicide. Othello’s anxiety about losing his authority and his shattered self-image as a betrayed husband are ultimately intertwined. Hence, this article offers fresh insights into Shakespearean plays by reading one representative piece, Othello , against some trends in literary theory not known during Shakespeare’s times but universal in their application to literary texts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicNarrative Theory and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207