MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788869953 · doi:10.5539/ells.v8n1p114

The Ambiguity in Turandot: An Orientalist Perspective

2018· article· en· W2788869953 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheater, Performance, and Music History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismOperaAmbiguityPerspective (graphical)ChinaPsychologyGender studiesAestheticsLiteratureSociologyHistoryPhilosophyArtLinguisticsVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper analyzes the Orientalization of the characters in Puccini’s seminal opera Turandot to prove that the Europeans’ perception formation of Asians is a process of “Orientalizing the Orient”. Two heroines, Turandot and Liu, suit the two polar extremes of the Asian women stereotypes in the West, dragon lady and Butterfly. Imperious and malicious Turandot and submissive and self-sacrificing Liu are simplified and generalized representations made by Europeans to meet their imaginations. Furthermore, Turandot and Calaf represent the national stereotypes of China and the West respectively. The refugee Prince appears to conquer the uncivilized land controlled by Turandot, a reflection of Western masculine superiority versus Asian feminine inferiority. To reduce the Orientalism associated with the opera, Chinese artists have been endeavoring to authenticate Turandot, yet this Western creation, due to her particular Orientalized characteristics, remains her ambiguity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.032
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicTheater, Performance, and Music HistoryFrench-language works237,207