MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Inside by M. Willmott

2009· article· en· W1971272206 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandra Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Howard Journal of Criminal Justice · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonArsonCriminologyPoliticsStupidityPoetryCasualHistorySociologyPsychologyLawArtLiteraturePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Victoria, BC., Canada : Trafford ( 2007 ) 66pp. £7.50pb ISBN 978-1-4251-0989-9 This self-published collection of prison writings is an exemplar of the tradition of giving voice to the experience of incarceration and, in particular, to using that voice as a means of personal change. Willmott's book, a collection of prose and poetry ranging from the deeply personal and reflective to the spiritual and political, though perhaps never able to reach a wide readership, is, arguably, an important piece of documentary evidence about one man's expression of coping with, and resisting, the experience of incarceration. Willmott was 56 years old in 2005 when he was incarcerated for the first time after being convicted of arson. Willmott describes his passage to prison as one that was fuelled by his addiction to alcohol, and part of his book is devoted to his reflections on this addiction, the insights he drew from various spiritual traditions, particularly Christianity, as well as his reflections on his crime: in his poem ‘Arson’, Willmott writes: ‘… autumnal fires have the power of purging,/purifying the bugged soil for spring planting. And the light of the fire,/and the excitement,/the cleansing of fire/can heal encrustations’ (p.16). Willmott's prose is perhaps most powerful when he speaks of his struggles to cope in what he describes as ‘the institutional insanity of the prison unsystem’ (preface) He writes about those elements of prison life which were able to anchor him: fellow prisoners: ‘companions, comforters, inspirers, communicators, eye-openers – stability’ (p.10), and visits ‘A reminder of normality, sanity, trust, love, faith in your future: light through the tunnel’ (p.11). Willmott's writings are, broadly, an attempt to make sense of the ‘island of self’ that is ‘battered’ by the ‘unwantonness’ and ‘unmercifulness’ of the prison experience (p.32). Writing is one of a number of creative arts that have been found to impact on an individual's well-being while they are incarcerated (Hughes 2005). In a recent review of the literature on the use of the arts in imprisonment, creative writing was found to benefit core aspects of identity-building: ‘naming experiences to facilitate engagement and interaction with the world combines with increased consciousness of the impact of self on the world and vice versa’ (Hughes 2005, p.68). This is echoed by Willmott himself, who writes in his preface: ‘Writing helps self-analysis, making sense, keeping self together – hope’. Willmott, like many individuals in prison, faced a crisis of selfhood to whom he felt he needed to give voice. The unique form that this takes for Willmott, part memoir, part fiction, part spiritual reflection, is a form of self-narrative. Maruna, Wilson and Curran (2006) describe the crisis of self-narrative that is common amongst prisoners: ‘if adults are motivated to find meaning, construct coherence, and generally “make sense” of their lives in ways that maintain self-esteem, prisoners experience a particular challenge in this regard’ (p.168). They argue that ‘being imprisoned can cause individuals to see the fragility of the web of meaning they previously took for granted. This realization can lead to reflection on issues of existence, life, and death, which are usually bracketed from everyday consideration’ (p.169). Curran (2002) writes that self-narratives can aid personal coherence and unity, helping to establish meaning for one's life, and supporting identity (pp.92–3). Willmott's book – an attempt to ‘keep the mind alive in this most mind-destroying of places’ (preface), is an important testament to this process of identity building.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Howard Journal of Criminal JusticeSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207