Captive and Free: An Interpretation of Human Reality in the Novels of Joyce Cary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The novelist, Joyce Cary, appears to accept human being as free, who is apparently captive, his footing on which his art of novel writing is constructed. It is his one of the inspirations and his source of creation. He projects society as the background of his novels. Protagonists and other characters find themselves at odds with the society. A consistency between free and captive has been very much schematic throughout the novels presenting his point of view. Consequences start moving from intuition to concept. His characters are flat as well as round ones. Moreover, they are free as well as captive. They are peopled with two types of human beings who may be termed as the captive and the free. However, they are real. They are humane. The wholeness of objectivity is very much schematic. The artist in Cary tries to cut deep through the encrustations of facts and life to get at the heart of the truth and reality. However, reality, human reality, appears to be perceptive. Hence, this research paper tries to investigate the purpose of the reality of society in general and reality of human beings in particular. It aims at finding out what reality is for the novelist in question. How the novelist perceives it. In addition, how the different characters of his novels do experience the reality of life?
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".