MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109867621 · doi:10.5539/ells.v4n4p45

On the Representations and Subversions of Orientalism in The Hundred Secret Senses

2014· article· en· W2109867621 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian American and Pacific Histories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanxi Normal University
KeywordsOrientalismStereotype (UML)SubversionMainstreamHegemonyPerspective (graphical)LiteratureSociologyGender studiesAestheticsHistoryPhilosophyArtPsychologyLawPoliticsPolitical scienceVisual artsSocial psychologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hundred Secret Senses is one of Amy Tan’s most acclaimed novels. This paper attempts to study the representations and subversion of Orientalism from the perspective of Said’s post-colonial theory. By depicting the protagonist Kwan’s marginality as the Other, exotic images of Chinese, Amy Tan actually reinforces the negative stereotype of the Chinese in the version of Orientalism. But her efforts to subvert and transcend Orientalism cannot be neglected. Amy Tan develops her writing strategies to challenge the mechanism of the American mainstream and subvert the stereotypes of Chinese. Kwan’s exotic and rebellious voices also act as a powerful weapon to break the silent stereotype and to fight against western language hegemony. And the Oriental representative Kwan functions as an active guider for her spiritually-lost sister Olivia. The limitation of Chinese American writers’ double identities inevitably covers their works with veils of Orientalism, but Amy Tan’s novels are imbued with superb artistic techniques to subvert and transcend it. The co-existence and co-benefit of different cultures and beliefs could be the consideration for Amy Tan’s wish in presenting this novel.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicAsian American and Pacific HistoriesFrench-language works237,207