MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030034384 · doi:10.1353/mfs.2004.0024

Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial (review)

2004· article· en· W2030034384 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brett Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueModern fiction studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystopiaLiteratureHistoryPoliticsArtLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial Brett Cooke Erika Gottlieb. Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial. Montreal: McGill-Queen's UP, 2001. x + 323. In her monumental study of major dystopian works, Erika Gottlieb focuses almost exclusively on the intentional miscarriage of justice in the societies depicted, all supposedly created to effect a moral social harmony. She uses trials to juxtapose and compare speculative fiction by Western writers, who either imagined in advance possible and malign political structures in America or Britain or reflected on contemporary Soviet and Nazi regimes, with texts by writers having direct experience in dystopia. Thus, well-known novels by Zamiatin, Huxley, and Orwell, complemented by others by Atwood, Vonnegut, and Bradbury, serve as benchmarks for works by Voinovich, Aksyonov, Daniel, and Zinoviev. While dystopia is usually seen as a speculative genre, dealing with the future as part of science fiction, Gottlieb examines realist texts by Serge, Rodionov, Sinyavski, Ribakov, Koestler, and Grossman about recent events. Then she takes her comparison into a third dimension with an analysis of dystopian literature by a number of postwar Polish, Czech, and Hungarian writers. Gottlieb notes that Western dystopias anticipate important features of Soviet Bloc despotism: arbitrary law behind a legal facade, the promulgation of intentional injustice, and show trials. Nineteenth-century projections, as in Imre Madach's Tragedy of Man, of the replacement of religion with utopian thought certainly came to pass. However, beginning with Orwell, the purportedly just rationale for [End Page 534] social engineering is stripped away, revealing a naked grasp on power for the sake of power. She shows how Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty Four are written about the USSR, noting how the regimentation of the society by a tiny elite, in effect, made prisoners of the entire populace. In Orwell's case, this was intended to end Western adulation of Stalin. Later North American dystopias were, of course, well-informed about the crimes committed in the name of utopia. Though they show how "it could happen here," they develop relatively minor facets of dystopia. Gottlieb reads Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 as a reaction to McCarthyism and the threat of media culture. In Vonnegut's Player Piano, the mechanization of labor is so thorough as to make human beings superfluous. Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale points to danger from the religious right. Such dystopian futures are the consequences of our collective failure to take preventive action; this, after all, is agitational literature, but such threats hardly concern us much today. In Gottlieb's view, dystopian fiction written in actual dystopia is different. The writers are exposed to danger; several were purged or imprisoned as a direct result of their works. They focus on the immediate consequences of social engineering: atrocities. Some novels take the point of view of a Chekist carrying out "revolutionary justice" of an arbitrary nature. With time, increasing attention is paid to the chaos and confusion resulting from the violence. A central question for Gottlieb is why true believers, whether in the infamous show trials or in Koestler's Darkness at Noon, incriminate themselves. In her discussion of Grossman's Life and Fate, Gottlieb highlights the similarity of Nazi and Soviet totalitarianism, of the war with the "peace" that follows, between life in the Gulag and outside, and wonders what one was to fight for. Further psychological damage of "revolutionary justice" comes to light in later East European works in the form of increasing absurdity as writers apparently adapt to dystopia. Not only is no one safe from persecution, citizens in their dystopias feel a need for oppression. The show trials provide a model for theatrical black humor. Violence gives way to grotesque absurdity: space is given to bureaucratic doubletalk and yet more arbitrary persecution, as the "fury of terror is followed by the apathy of disintegration" (240). Covering this massive literature with consistent insight, Gottlieb makes but few missteps. She stretches dystopian literature to include realism about contemporary conditions, discusses Zamiatin with Western writers, and pursues an argument that Orwell was paving the way for "democratic socialism," which is vestigial. Her "trial" often amounts to a nonformal confrontation...

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)0.006
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern fiction studiesSame topicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionFrench-language works237,207