MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000306224 · doi:10.1111/glal.12253

‘WAS GLÄNZT, DAS SIEHT’: MECHANISMS OF SURVEILLANCE AND OPPRESSION IN HERTA MÜLLER'S <i>DER FUCHS WAR DAMALS SCHON DER JÄGER</i>

2020· article· en· W3000306224 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Life and Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionHumanitiesIdeologyNarrativeArtAestheticsPhilosophySociologyArt historyLiteratureLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article focuses on the recurring themes of surveillance and oppression in Müller's novel Der Fuchs war damals schon der Jäger . Using Foucault's concept of the panoptic gaze, as well as art historian W. J. T. Mitchell's idea of the ‘hypericon’ as theoretical frames, it examines how Müller relies on the disruptive force of shiny details to expose and denounce mechanisms of surveillance and oppression in her novel. As implied in the novel's leitmotiv ‘Was glänzt, das sieht’, all things that shine and glitter help reveal the haunting effect of being monitored and threatened by the intrusive tactics of the Securitate , Romania's notorious secret police under Ceauşescu's dictatorial regime. By drawing attention to Müller's verbal imagery, and more specifically to the symbolic meaning which she grants to shiny, fragmented details in her novel, this article's aim is also to demonstrate how this procedure is yet another literary and aesthetic strategy used by Müller to further shatter and condemn totalitarian ideologies in her narratives.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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