Sons and Lovers and the Mirage: Recognition, Melodrama and Psychoanalysis in Mahfūz’s al-Sarāb
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This essay provides a commentary on one of the less celebrated novels of Najīb Mahfū z,al-Sarāb (The Mirage), one of a series of tragic melodramas he wrote in the 1940s. Uniquely in Mahfūz’s oeuvre, this novel explores an “Oedipal” relationship between the narrator/protagonist and his mother; it is a relationship that blights the man’s married life. What Aristotle identified as anagnorisis—a movement towards startling disclosure—is a common feature of Oedipal narratives; the anagnorisis in Sophocles’s Oedipus Rex being the most famous example (and Aristotle’s favorite instance of tragic disclosure). In general, and across genres, anagnorisis provides narratives with familiar, sometimes comforting, shape; it can also provide an interpretive portal onto the meaning and values revealed by a narrative. It tends to provide closure, especially in melodrama, and often purveys a sense of certainty (though in contemporary or experimental fiction that complacency is often misplaced: incertitude, ambiguity and difficult knowledge are just as often revealed). The commentary below concentrates on three aspects of al-Sarāb alluded to and the relationship between them: recognition, psychoanalysis and melodrama.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".