MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613880709

Searching Between the Lines: Ambiguity, Paralysis and Revisionist Readings of Joyce’s “Eveline”

2017· article· en· W2613880709 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Wieczorek

Bibliographic record

VenueVerso: An Undergraduate Journal of Literary Criticism · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbiguityHistoricismLiteraturePhilosophyIrishInterpretation (philosophy)CriticismHistoryEpistemologyArtLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chris Wieczorek’s “Searching Between the Lines: Ambiguity, Paralysis and Revisionist Readings of Joyce’s Eveline” is an exemplary research essay that, as its title suggests, spells out its thesis in its methodology, taking the reader step by logical step through the act and history of interpreting one of the most critically acclaimed and debated stories in James Joyce’s Dubliners. It deftly and articulately summarizes a wide range of interpretations, both traditional and revisionist, before coming up the middle to turn the light on reader response. In a collection that famously focusses on the paralysis that afflicts turn-of-thecentury Irish society, readers have traditionally focussed on Eveline’s failures, while historicist and revisionary critics have highlighted the failures of Frank, her suspiciously glib paramour. After crisply summarizing these interpretations, Wieczorek draws attention to their gaps, and argues that the story is actually about failures in the reader, who is “repeatedly forced to question, and then re-evaluate, our judgements about Eveline’s decision.” Persuasive, immaculately structured and accessibly written, this essay seems to enjoy doing what we do in English, and I think its readers will agree. —Dr. Judith Thompson

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVerso: An Undergraduate Journal of Literary CriticismSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207