MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808749137 · doi:10.1093/fs/kny123

É <scp>mile</scp> Z <scp>ola</scp> , <i>La Débâcle</i> . Translated by E <scp>linor</scp> D <scp>orday</scp> and edited by R <scp>obert</scp> L <scp>ethbridge</scp> ZolaÉmile, <i>La Débâcle</i> . Translated by E <scp>linor</scp> D <scp>orday</scp> and edited by R <scp>obert</scp> L <scp>ethbridge</scp> . New edn. (Oxford World’s Classics.) Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. xxxix + 536 pp., maps.

2018· article· en· W2808749137 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandra Tranca

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)HistorySpanish Civil WarInterpretation (philosophy)Art historyPerformance artLiteratureArtSubject (documents)HumanitiesClassicsPhilosophyArchaeologyLibrary scienceLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This reissue of Zola’s La Débâcle arrives at a timely moment in the context of the First World War centenary and complements the publication of the French critical edition by David Baguley (Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2012). While the new edition is not intended to compete with the latter in comprehensiveness, Robert Lethbridge’s synoptic Introduction offers a highly compelling, scholarly discussion of Zola’s famous war novel. Lethbridge provides an overview of the themes and motifs that create different levels of interpretation (historical fiction; symbolical and allegorical paradigms), complicating the reception and deciphering of the novel. He outlines the literary and historical scope of the project, showing how Zola’s decision to write in a particular context afforded an ‘aesthetic and philosophical’ distance that shaped his perspective on the events and approach to the subject (p. xiv). This penultimate work in the monumental Rougon-Macquart family saga marks the climactic point of the series and recounts the experience of the Franco-Prussian War and the Commune. A best-seller during the author’s time and up to the First World War, Zola’s powerful evocation of the brutal realities and chaos of combat became a landmark for modern representations of conflict. Lethbridge discusses Zola’s solutions to the difficult task of depicting historical events on such a scale within a fictive framework. A detailed portrayal of the movements of the Seventh Corps, as well as references to the strategies deployed on the rest of the Front, foreground the disorganization and errors that sealed France’s fate. With this in mind, the Oxford edition contains a series of maps that give a sense of the spaces of conflict (including Paris) and through which readers can trace the progress of the 106th Regiment, in which Zola places his protagonists. They also help us visualize the strategies deployed by both armies, thus grasping, on the one hand, the adroit manoeuvres of the German forces, who targeted critical positions that confined and incapacitated the French, and, on the other, the tactical mistakes of the French and their ill-fated decisions. Given the complex architecture of Zola’s novel, which was constructed in three parts that manipulate time in order to recreate the combatants’ disorientation, this edition also contains a useful chronology of the events of 1870 and 1871, a list of characters to help keep track of the extensive cast, and a set of endnotes that shed light on topical and historical references, rendering them accessible to a non-specialist. This second edition’s bibliography was updated to reflect the most recent scholarship. Elinor Dorday conveys the vividness of Zola’s prose with a masterful sense of the language and its context. One aspect that is often challenging concerns translating the louche expressions and expletives of a language and culture. These are prominent in Zola’s dialogues between the military at all hierarchical levels. Dorday’s conservative rendition, appropriate for the novel’s period, remains faithful to the colour and roughness in such exchanges. This is an accomplished edition and a rewarding read within and beyond the academic environment.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0130.016
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0120.005
Research integrity0.0100.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.207 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueFrench StudiesSame topicFrench Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207