Fantasy and Education in Eliza Haywood’s <i>The Adventures of Eovaai</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Adventures of Eovaai (1736) stands out, both within Eliza Haywood’s career and among mid-eighteenth-century novels, for its highly constructed, fantastical narrative. Despite the proliferation of fantasy tropes within the text, many readings of Eovaai focus on its political allegory. This article centres on the fantastical elements, particularly the incorporation of illusory magic, to explore the novel’s contributions to feminist philosophical discourse. In Eovaai, Haywood enters a conversation about gender, truth, and perception begun by Mary Astell. Haywood uses the oft-decried genre of fantasy to probe more accurately the physical and political stakes of Astell’s abstract theories. Reading Eovaai alongside Astell’s philosophical work makes patent Haywood’s investment in theorizing feminist models of perception and authority, an effort continued in her later work. This expansive understanding of Eovaai uncovers Haywood’s often unrecognized connections to rational feminist discourse in the period while demonstrating that her generic invention— widely acknowledged in terms of the amatory—extends to other genres.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".