MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111875701 · doi:10.33137/q.i..v40i2.34882

Negotiations of a Woman’s Self: Liminal Experiences and Dialogic Reconsiderations in Anna Banti’s Un grido lacerante

2020· article· en· W3111875701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Torunn Haaland

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaderni d italianistica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussian Literature and Bakhtin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogicLiminalityChronotopeHeteroglossiaNarrativeSociologyIdentity (music)SelfAestheticsPsychologyGender studiesEpistemologyPsychoanalysisSocial psychologyLiteratureArtPhilosophyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the authorial figure in Anna Banti’s last work, Un grido lacerante. An introspective portrait of an aging author whose life and career have been shaped by remorse over a lost vocation, the novel has traditionally been interpreted as an expression of the autobiographical and historical dimension of Banti’s work. Moving away from notions of self-confessional narratives in favor of an analysis of textual strategies, this study investigates the role of the protagonist within a self-research that opens up to shared experiences and problems of existential, interpersonal and socio-cultural importance. This universalist focus engages in particular Bakhtin’s concepts of dialogic construction and narrative space-time. While the “chronotope” of the threshold encloses the liminality of the protagonist between contradictory identities and inclinations, the idea of a “dialogic self” accentuates the function of this unresolved intermediate position in promoting a subject that is negotiated in relation to internal and external constraints. By formulating an unconventional idea of self and a narrative that develops in a fragmentary and contradictory way to overcome the limits of its own fiction, the novel confronts the constraints women face in pursuing their inclinations and aspirations and addresses issues of a more humanistic nature concerning the right to construct and define one’s own identity independently of conceptions and norms of gender behaviour.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.025
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.286
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaderni d italianisticaSame topicRussian Literature and Bakhtin StudiesFrench-language works237,207