Essential Others and Spontaneous Recovery in the Life and Work of Emily Carr: Implications for Understanding Remission of Illness and Resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1871-1945) has attained iconic status in Canada and throughout the world for her prodigious output as a painter and writer of the Pacific Northwest. This article describes how the arrival of three "essential others" at pivotal moments in middle life helped lift Carr out of a serious, lifelong depression and nurtured and inspired her creative output. I propose that Carr's productivity and psychological recovery were facilitated by sequential, cumulative input from these generative human contacts. The creative partnership formed between an artist and her muse has features akin to the patient/therapist dyad, ranging from sparking new and healthier adaptations, to reshaping the internal landscape via internalization, to facilitation and promotion of unique talent. This psychobiographical study of Emily Carr is a vehicle for clinicians to further contemplate elements imbedded in our daily work that give rise to greater resilience, spontaneous recovery from illness, and personal transformation in the lives of our patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".