MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024473425 · doi:10.3329/sje.v7i0.14469

Kim and A Passage to India: A Binary of Colonial Attitude

2013· article· en· W2024473425 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammed Elham Hossain, Mustafizur Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueStamford Journal of English · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish Identity
Canadian institutionsLa Cité Collégiale
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinary oppositionColonialismOpposition (politics)CivilizationHistoryLiteratureAestheticsSociologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceArtPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In modern linguistics binary distinctions are fundamental and many social and cultural phenomena are based on binary oppositions. Even many stereotypes of culture get formulated on the basis of binary oppositions: “If you are not with me you are against me” (Hawthorn 29) is a cultural imposition of a binary opposition upon variations of attitude. Looking down upon the natives of the Subcontinent as a people, devoid of civilization, colonial authors produced the stereotypes of attitude which remained unchanged, fortified by prejudices and cultural biases. Reading of colonial texts which are based on Indian setting, reveals these stereotypes. Rudyard Kipling’s Kim and E. M. Forster’s A Passage to India pictured colonial India from European perspective, degrading it to the level of a land of mystery, muddle, inactivity and lethargy. Both the texts depicted India as a binary opposition of Europe, formulated with cultural biases and prejudices emerging out of the boastfulness of the colonizers as the light givers of civilization to the rest of the globe. But it is true that every reading is a re-creation of the identity of the author and this axiom has inspired this paper to explore the basis of binary oppositions of the colonial attitude of Rudyard Kipling and E. M. Forster. This paper is also inspired by the perception that literary and cultural phenomena are based upon binary oppositions and in the days of postcolonial theory binary oppositions have become fundamental to many recent literary works. Keeping this in mind, this paper seeks to explore Kipling’s Kim and E. M. Forster’s A Passage to India in colonial perspective and present binary distinctions of their attitude towards India. Both the authors have chosen India as setting of their above mentioned novels and their observation of the East and the West produced binary distinctions between Europe and the Subcontinent. This paper has made a deconstructionist analysis of these stereotypes. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/sje.v7i0.14469 Stamford Journal of English; Volume 7; Page 129-144

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

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 studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStamford Journal of EnglishSame topicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish IdentityFrench-language works237,207