MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169972124 · doi:10.3138/utq.90.1.02

Popular Music and the Modernist Dystopia: <i>Brave New World</i> and <i>Nineteen Eighty-Four</i>

2021· article· en· W3169972124 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alex MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsCampion CollegeUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystopiaPopular musicLiteratureMusicalModernism (music)Popular cultureArtAestheticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay explores musical references in Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four, including music imagery and allusions to popular songs of the 1920s and 1940s. Huxley used the popular music of the Brave New World as an indicator of its emotional shallowness, represented by such immortal songs as “Hug Me Till You Drug Me, Honey.” Brave New World’s scorn for popular music, and for popular culture in general, situates Huxley’s famous dystopia as a high Modernist work. In Orwell’s case, implicit references to World War II hits such as “We’ll Meet Again” and “I’ll Be Seeing You” reflect ironically upon the relationship of Winston and Julia and their terrible situation at the end of the novel. His treatment of the musical thrush and the singing Prole laundrywoman plays a more hopeful note, and a positive attitude to popular songs and popular culture situates Nineteen Eighty-Four on the cusp of Post-Modernism. With respect to the critical discourse about hope and despair in these dystopian texts, the essay suggests that signs of hopefulness in Brave New World are very slight, although they do exist. The music of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and some other factors, lend support to the view that Orwell’s novel is not so despairing as it is sometimes made out to be.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207