Dreaming the Unstable Wings of Desire: Unseen, Educational Bruisings and The Elusive Self of Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When it comes to education, the dream cannot be controlled by the strictures of language or the conscious mind, and in its insistently disobedient character, is unwilling to submit to the demands of a deliberate and conscious curriculum. Indeed, we might say that what dreams represent is the absence of education itself, and a mobile energy antithetical to a fantasy of smoothly functioning teaching. In this article, we approach the question of dreaming’s place in education through two intertwined lenses: the conceptual and the literary. First, we intersperse throughout our paper excerpts from an untitled fictional narrative about a group of students who become progressively more beaten up, and whose teacher is unable to see their bruises, as they embark on the precarious task of expressing their dreaming, creative selves. We also turn to psychoanalytic theory (and, in particular, Thomas Ogden’s theory of dream thinking) to discuss the significance of the impenetrable nature of the dream, and ask how such qualities of unrepresentability might challenge our desires for answerable questions and legible answers. We end this piece with a recognition of the ways in which shared experiences of reading and writing may also support a place for dreams.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.074 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".