MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229022262 · doi:10.7202/1088471ar

Another Way of Seeing: Ecological Existentialism in Cortázar’s “Axolotl”

2022· article· en· W4229022262 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krysten Voelkner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Trumpeter · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEcocriticism and Environmental Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExistentialismEcocriticismEcological crisisPhilosophyScholarshipEcologyEnvironmental ethicsSociologyPsychoanalysisEpistemologyPsychologyPolitical scienceBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides a reading of Julio Cortázar’s short story “Axolotl” through the dual lenses of ecocriticism and mid-century existentialism. Specifically, the critical perspective of this work is inspired by the writings of existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, and German biologist Jakob Johann von Uexküll. Such an interdisciplinary approach is intended to articulate a unique ecological perspective known as environmental existentialism. This critical approach not only acknowledges the longstanding influence that the existentialist movement has had on environmental scholarship, but also suggests that existentialist concepts are especially relevant to our contemporary ecological moment, and thus should continue to be employed in current ecological discourse. The primary locus of critical attention in this work centers on Sartre’s theory of the Look, Uexküll’s notion of the search tone, and Cortázar’s emphasis on suffering. These concepts are examined in concert to suggest that the correlations between the dominant issues of existentialist thought and our contemporary moment ought to signal to readers the existential threat that the age of the Anthropocene poses, as well as the value of reading texts both old and new through the lens of existential ecocriticism.

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 score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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)0.0190.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe TrumpeterSame topicEcocriticism and Environmental LiteratureFrench-language works237,207