MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110657516 · doi:10.1093/litthe/fraa020

Becoming Divine Women: Miriam Toews’ <i>Women Talking</i> as Parable1

2020· article· en· W3110657516 on OpenAlexaffabout
Grace Kehler

Bibliographic record

VenueLiterature and Theology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePower (physics)Feminist theologyContext (archaeology)PhilosophySociologyLiteratureTheologyGender studiesArtHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article attends to the ways in which Canadian Mennonite novelist Miriam Toews’ Women Talking crafts a feminist theological parable of women envoicing and incarnating pacifism in the context of a purportedly pacifist colony devastated by patriarchal violence. I argue that the novel, like the biblical parables, functions as a ‘mythos (a heuristic fiction) which has the mimetic power of “redescribing” [pained] human existence’ in reparative terms (Ricoeur). More particularly, as a feminist theological parable, the novel displays in literary form what Luce Irigaray philosophically conceives of as ‘becoming divine women’. I first explore definitions of biblical parables and divine becomings, prior to turning my attention to the Bolivian crisis, and then to Toews’ hopeful, revisionist narrative.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.023
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiterature and TheologySame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207