MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072112343 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.21.2.4

'Thinking Themselves Halved when they are Atomized': Identity Contradictions in Marian Engel's <i>No Clouds of Glory</i> and <i>The Honeyman Festival</i>

2008· article· en· W2072112343 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cinda Gault

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGloryIdentity (music)NationalismConsciousnessReading (process)Focus (optics)SociologyAestheticsGender studiesHistoryEpistemologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on Marian Engel's first two novels to explore why critics were so often disappointed in her work. Engel's focus on individual female and national consciousness within social and historical circumstances was generally considered a good start, but she apparently took a wrong turn when she did not discover workable identities in an era of dominant Canadian nationalist and second-wave feminist identity movements. Engel resisted the idea of discoverable identity, and the reception of her work suffered. Her less optimistic treatment of identity stands up better today, when we are less sure about the existence of resolvable identities at all. Re-reading these two novels as explorations of obstacles that interfere with identity reveals a compelling pattern: characters are confronted with what troubles their understandings of themselves as women and Canadians.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0520.071
Scholarly communication0.0170.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.009
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.236
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207