Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Irish cultural and political convention, woman's place has been colonised, subjected to restricted and marginalised interpretation and representation. Postcolonialism in the work of Mary Dorcey is the result of a process of recognition and exposure of colonialism in its denial and repression of identity and the restoration and reconstruction of that identity in political, sexual and literary contexts. Dorcey recognises and exposes colonialism in the context of sexuality and presents a postcolonial stance in response, robustly stating, Lifelong brainwashing from the cradle to the grave to remain faithful to heterosexuality is still not sufficient to keep everyone suppressed. The entire force of Church and State, the entire weight of international culture, is not enough to suppress the strength of nature. The instinct to joy and love and intimacy is irrepressible. Another kind of colonialism exposed is that of the literary and cultural establishment in Ireland and the consequent denial of the female voice. Dorcey explores and exposes relationships between mother, daughter and lover in the 'Queer Place' of post-colonial Ireland. The state/church patriarchy of persecution, which Dorcey has openly resisted as a lesbian writer and academic, is addressed in her poetry through the subversion of structured verses. From these, her words move out into more fluid forms, expressing her ideas and feelings, which clearly reflect this resistance. Dorcey's especial talent is to take the ordinary and examine its emotional potential, to demonstrate the fundamental need to recognise and celebrate human anguish and ecstasy, to acknowledge Irish women poets' postcolonial presence in the political, sexual and literary contexts they inhabit. She clearly contributes significantly to the claim that, …women's poetry currently leads Irish poetry in its role in prompting the people of this island towards recognition that accepting and celebrating difference is the truest basis of personal and group identity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".