Undoing Realism: Reclaiming the Garden of Eden in George Sand’s <i>Isidora</i> (1845)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
George Sand’s idealist novel Isidora (1845) can be read, I argue, as a feminist re-writing of the Biblical Fall and the Garden of Eden.1 In Pouvoirs de l’horreur (1980), Julia Kristeva notes that ‘le récit de la chute met en scène une altérité diabolique par rapport au divin’.2 It is specifically a covetous desire for woman which Kristeva states as rupturing the divine in paradise, as Adam is torn apart by temptation: ‘Adam n’a plus la calme nature de l’homme paradisiaque, il est déchiré par la convoitise: désir de la femme.’3 Thus, whilst sin can be interpreted as being brought into the world by both Adam and Eve, ‘sa racine et sa représentation fondamentale n’est autre que la tentation féminine’.4 Although Kristeva does not mention the textual re-appropriation of this strand of theological thinking within literary contexts, the textual equation of woman, sin and desire is...
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 | 0.013 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".