“Poetics of the Potent”: Yann Martel's Life of Pi, Edgar Allan Poe's <i>The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket</i>, and Modes of Transcreation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DEPENDING ON TIME AND CULTURE, concepts of authorship have varied greatly, affecting our notions of how a writer should engage both with what we call “reality” and with literary products of the past. As far as the former is concerned, an “authentic” account based on actual observation or at least producing “un effet de réel ” (Barthes 1968, 88; emphasis in the original) might be just as welcome as an imaginary tale full of fantastic elements. With regard to the latter, stances taken range from the appreciation of texts that are close copies of well-known precursors, thus embracing the principle of imitatio , to the reverence of artworks that seem unique and original. Often, relations between these aspects are highly complex and hard to disentangle. Thus landscape descriptions in allegedly truthful reports may include elements that can only be explained by preconceived notions of ideal places and a strong literary tradition. Conversely, it is not uncommon for authors of prose fiction to rely on actual travel reports. In “The Journal of Julius Rodman: Being an Account of the First Passage Across the Rocky Mountains of North America Ever Achieved by Civilized Man” (1840) Edgar Allan Poe (1809–1849) made use of a number of such sources, among them the journals of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, who recorded their overland expedition of 1804–06 to the Pacific Northwest (1814), and Alexander Mackenzie's Voyages from Montreal, on the River St. Laurence, Through the Continent of North America, To the Frozen and Pacific Oceans: In the Years 1789 and 1793 … (1801). Poe's extensive borrowings did not stop at firsthand accounts of real travels but included texts like Washington Irving's Astoria, or Anecdotes of an Enterprise Beyond the Rocky Mountains (1836) that in their turn hark back to the original accounts—here the journals of Lewis and Clark—and thus complicate matters further. Speaking of “verbal collage” and specifying instances of “verbatim copying, close or loose paraphrase, and even deliberate contradiction or citation by opposition” (Poe 1981, 512–14), Poe's latter-day editor Burton R. Pollin ultimately accuses the American author of “unoriginality” and “plagiarism,” as Liliane Weissberg (1987, 420) convincingly argues in her analysis of Pollin's editorial procedure.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".