Medici e farmacisti: sempre coltissimi, sempre colpevoli nei romanzi del quebecchese Hubert Aquin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay focuses on two novels by the Quebecois author Hubert Aquin (1929-1977), Trou de mémoire (1968) and L’antiphonaire (1969), in which doctors and chemists are the main characters and the writing heroes at the same time. Setting aside the great structural and thematic topics of these two novels that the critics have long studied, it appears that the medical and the pharmaceutical discourse pervasively affects the style. This essay analyses the many reasons why this medical-pharmaceutical erudition is so developed in the text; both main characters show indeed a proud superiority, which they achieved thanks to their skills as scientists and meant to defeat their condition of overshadowed men. Nevertheless, they are going to reenter the same condition at the very moment when a catastrophic event takes place. So they try to reestablish the same equilibrium by means of creative writing, which eventually turns out to be a very difficult task leading them to a nonsensical, encyclopedic ostentation. Behind this mask of erudition, the so called (by Aquin) «fatigue culturelle du Canada français» pops out inexorably, a despairing condition that, in the worst case, leads to suicide.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".