Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines George Gissing's unfinished novel Veranilda (1904) to argue for the insights that it imparts on the debates between individual agency and deterministic circumstances, and between action and inaction. Criticism has performed the crucial task of situating the novel in the contexts of Gissing's oeuvre, his study of the Classics, and its publication. My essay contributes to scholarship by attending to the development of Basil, the central protagonist, to reveal the value of indecision and inaction in the context of the novel's political climate. I begin by analysing the conclusions that have been put forward by Gissing's contemporaries and especially the ending that is foreshadowed by the published text. In so doing, I show how Veranilda seems to insist upon the futility of an individual's actions notwithstanding his or her best intentions. I go on to analyse Basil's social position as an aristocrat, discussing how its attendant qualities in class and bearing could not have prepared him for the challenges of dealing with the story's conflicts. Where Basil begins as a very real victim of circumstance, I trace his development of independence and free will – terms that have particular force when applied to Gissing's wider oeuvre.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".