Viols naturalistes : « commune histoire » ou « épouvantable aventure » ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On viole beaucoup dans le roman naturaliste. Mais ce qui est présenté comme une fatalité de la condition féminine ne donne pas lieu dans la plupart des récits à de véritables histoires. Contre le fait divers, les mélodrames, le roman-feuilleton, les romans sentimentaux du xixe siècle, le naturalisme désamorce le pathétique et les drames qui caractérisent la littérature du viol. Il s’agit en effet de l’afficher comme « commune histoire », dont les conditions et les raisons relèvent d’explications déterministes qui tendent finalement à soustraire le viol au scandale. Zola, néanmoins, par une évolution qui lui est propre, retrouve au fil des Rougon-Macquart ce goût du scandale et d’un viol « romanesque » qu’il s’efforce de formuler et d’évaluer dans des montages scénaristiques parfois risqués.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".