Laughing at Unbearable Urges: Reshaping the Male-Authored Script of Desire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Pierre Champion noted a half a century ago, “ The Cent Nouvelles nouvelles open a secret door into the house of men of that time.” The misogynous aspect of these novellas, designed to inspire laughter, is evident in most of the stories dealing with masculine drives and uncontrollable desires of husbands to seduce other women without being discovered. Novella 9 is a prime example of such a scenario, a novella that serves as Marguerite de Navarre’s intertext in the Heptaméron’s novella 8. In this article I will analyze how Marguerite reshapes her fifteenth-century intertext in order to promote a highly protofeminist agenda. All the while maintaining the same structure and characters, she introduces changes that are both subtle and radical. The focus of my analysis will show how these changes put into question the masculinist vision offered by CNN 9 and open instead a space for a commentary on women’s agency and their quest for their own pleasure. Comme Pierre Champion l’a remarqué il y a 50 ans, « Les Cent nouvelles nouvelles ouvrent ... une porte secrète de la maison des hommes de ce temps ». L’aspect misogyne de ces nouvelles destinées à faire rire est évident dans la plupart des nouvelles, où il s’agit des pulsions masculines et du désir incontrôlable de la part d’un mari volage de séduire une autre femme sans en être découvert. Telle est la situation dans la nouvelle 9 de cette collection, nouvelle qui sert comme intertexte de la nouvelle 8 de L’Heptaméron. Dans cet article je vais analyser comment Marguerite remanie cette nouvelle du XVe siècle afin de promouvoir ses idées protoféministes. Tout en gardant la même structure et les mêmes personnages, Marguerite introduit des changements à la fois subtils et radicaux, changements qui remettent en question la vision masculiniste offerte dans CNN 9 et ouvre un espace pour un commentaire sur la prise de parole de la femme à la recherche de son propre plaisir.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".