MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062727484 · doi:10.1080/10509585.2012.728828

“The Walls of Her Prison”: Madness, Gender, and Discursive Agency in Eliza Fenwick's<i>Secresy</i>and Mary Wollstonecraft's<i>The Wrongs of Woman</i>

2012· article· en· W2062727484 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Cove

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Romantic Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligion, Gender, and Enlightenment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilencePrisonAgency (philosophy)Gender studiesSociologyPsychoanalysisLiteratureHistoryArtAestheticsPsychologyCriminologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The female protagonists of Eliza Fenwick's Secresy and Mary Wollstonecraft's The Wrongs of Woman are located on the margins of madness, exploring the space between psychological disorder and reason. Both novels radically challenge eighteenth-century gendered discourses of madness and the accompanying institutions that sequester and silence women. However, while Fenwick and Wollstonecraft work to undermine gendered constructions of madness, they nonetheless remain bound to the discursive limits that divide madness and reason irreparably. Together, Secresy and The Wrongs of Woman indicate the pervasiveness of eighteenth-century discourses of madness, as both novels are finally unable to subvert the assumptions underlying these discourses, continuing to associate the feminine with unreason and madness with the inarticulate and incomprehensible.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.019
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Romantic ReviewSame topicReligion, Gender, and EnlightenmentFrench-language works237,207