Bibliographic record
Abstract
In The Tempest , Shakespeare portrays Miranda as a character which follows the path designed for her by Prospero, her father. Margret Atwood, through appropriating and intertextualizing Shakespeare’s The Tempest , reconstructs Miranda to be a motivator of action rather than a receiver of a patriarchal power. It is through recreating Shakespeare’s Miranda, Atwood gives her more spaces of critical analysis rather than being critically confined to the frame of femininity. This paper argues that Atwood’s Hag-Seed , by means of intertextuality and appropriation, recreates a new Miranda who is almost ignored by critical studies that focus mainly on reading The Tempest from post-colonial perspectives. As a feminist, though she claims not to be, Atwood consciously employs Shakespeare’s conceptual and thematic concerns like a play within a play, revenge, usurpation, and the father-daughter relationship. These concerns, which are mainly tackled in The Tempest , are employed by Atwood for the sake of creating a new Miranda who would determine and motivate the whole action of Hag-Seed . Atwood’s appropriation, this paper argues, is a feminist revision of a canonical text that limits woman’s role, and presents her either with the quality of passive innocence, or with that one of the devilish witch.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".