The Dynamic Interplay of Intertextuality and the Anti-Colonial Discourse in Rhys’ Short Narrative The Day They Burned the Books
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his The Art of Fiction , David Lodge tackles the concept of intertextuality from a structuralist point of view. He articulates the referential relationships that link texts to each other. Lodge identifies intertextuality as one of these relationships. Within the context of post colonialism, making numerous references to other texts reflects a writer’s quest and his perpetual struggle for power—a matter that echoes Foucault’s idea of the interdependence between power, knowledge, truth and discourses. This essay aims at analyzing Jean Rhys’ short narrative The Day They Burned the Books under the rubrics of intertextuality that highlights the dialectic relationship between Rhys’ text on the one hand, and Shakespeare’s The Tempest on the other hand. The essay identifies the way Rhys’ short narrative is a writing back that is unconsciously motived by Shakespeare’s colonial discourse in his The Tempest . Moreover, it clarifies certain elements that bring together Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Jean Rhys’ The Day They Burned the Books .
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".