‘WAS GLÄNZT, DAS SIEHT’: MECHANISMS OF SURVEILLANCE AND OPPRESSION IN HERTA MÜLLER'S <i>DER FUCHS WAR DAMALS SCHON DER JÄGER</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".