De Un roman naturel à Physique de la mélancolie (Gueorgui Gospodinov) : de « nous sommes je » à « je sommes nous ». À la recherche de la totalité perdue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I see a very Proustian movement between these two novels: from a widespread doubt, an agonizing crisis caused by the dissolution of “identity” and certainties, announcing the Apocalypse in Natural novel, towards melancholic but serene acceptance of this crisis, under the sign of empathy in The Physics of Sorrow. After the agonizing conclusion that “we are I” follows the answer: “I are”. I am all of humanity. Proustian movement of painful quest that ends with luminous epiphanies and opens interesting ways for renewing our approach and looking anew at both postmodern literature and “self-writings”. Which kind of writing could reflect the doubt, which is “inherently linked to métissage”, the mobility, the lability of “identity” today, if not postmodern, a Métis writing par excellence? Entre ces deux romans s’opère un mouvement finalement très proustien : mouvement du doute généralisé, de la crise angoissante suscitée par la dissolution de l’« l’identité » et des certitudes, annonciatrice de l’apocalypse dans Un roman naturel, vers l’acceptation mélancolique mais sereine de cette crise, placée sous le signe de l’empathie dans Physique de la mélancolie. Au constat angoissant du « nous sommes je » succède la réponse : « je sommes nous ». Je suis l’humanité tout entière. Mouvement proustien de quête douloureuse qui s’achève sur des épiphanies lumineuses et ouvre des pistes de réflexion intéressantes pour renouveler notre approche et notre regard à la fois du postmoderne en littérature et des « écritures du moi ». Comment rendre compte du doute, « intrinsèquement lié au métissage 31 », de la mobilité, de la labilité de « l’identité » d’aujourd’hui, sinon par le postmoderne, écriture métisse par excellence ? Пътят между двата романа се извървя по много прустовски начин – от всеобщото съмнение, от страшната криза, предизвикана от разтворената „идентичност“ и увереност в стабилността на нещата, която предвещава апокалипсиса в Естествен роман, към тъжното, но спокойно приемане на тази криза благодарение на емпатията във Физика на тъгата. След обезпокояващото установяване, че „ние сме аз“ идва отговорът – „аз сме“. Аз съм цялото човечество. Прустовски път на болезнено издирване, което свършва със светли епифании, като очертава интересни писти за нови разсъждения, както за постмодерното в литературата, така и за „аз-формата на писане“. Как да отразим съмнението, което е „неразривно свързано със смесването (métissage)“, подвижната и лабилна „идентичност“ на нашата съвременност, ако не чрез постмодерното, което е смесено писане par excellence?
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".