Risk, Mortality, and Memory: The Global Imaginaries of Cherie Dimaline’s The Marrow Thieves, M.G. Vassanji’s Nostalgia, and André Alexis’s Fifteen Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo examina tres novelas canadienses contemporáneas basadas en la sociedad del\n\t\t\t\t riesgo global usando un modo ficticio especulativo que inquiere: «¿Qué pasaría si?» The\n\t\t\t\t Marrow Thieves (2017), de Cherie Dimaline, y Nostalgia (2016), de M.G. Vassanji, imaginan\n\t\t\t\t sociedades distópicas devastadas por el cambio climático para analizar los ideales humanistas\n\t\t\t\t del Progreso. Fifteen Dogs (2015), de André Alexis, usa la fábula animal para abordar qué\n\t\t\t\t significa ser un animal mortal. Cada una profundiza en las implicaciones de una conciencia\n\t\t\t\t de riesgo para la agentividad y la ética: para los pueblos indígenas en The Marrow Thieves;\n\t\t\t\t para los habitantes de Toronto en el contexto de un apartheid global intensificado en Nostalgia;\n\t\t\t\t y para los perros que luchan con una inteligencia humana otorgada por Dios en el\n\t\t\t\t Toronto contemporáneo de Fifteen Dogs. Al negociar el riesgo, cada ficción recurre al papel\n\t\t\t\t de la memoria, la creatividad y las formas alternativas de subjetividad y comunidad para\n\t\t\t\t garantizar la supervivencia. Las tres narrativas dan pasos sutiles, aunque necesarios, hacia\n\t\t\t\t futuros alternativos con la habilidad de imaginar de una forma distinta.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".