Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book argues that Victorian culture perceived the orphan as a scapegoat - a promise and a threat, a poison and a cure. It first establishes a discursive context in which to read the orphan figure as embodying a difference within the family. To do so, it describes the figure of Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights against a number of discourses - namely, those of the foundling, the orphan as foreigner, and the orphan as criminal. The book then looks at the role of the orphan and popular orphan adventure narratives in policing and extending empire. It considers Charles Dickens's 'The Perils of Certain English Prisoners, and Their Treasure in Women, Children, Silver and Jewels' within the context of both the Indian Mutiny of 1857 and Dickens's own imperial sympathies. The book also offers the historical context for the schemes adopted at the time for emigrating orphans. It focuses on the three main destinations -Bermuda, New South Wales and Canada - in order to consider the motivations behind the emigrating of orphans and the contemporary evaluations of it. In this historical context, the book positions Rose Macaulay's Orphan Island (1924), which in its Utopian framework poses problems for the both the rationale of the schemes and for current debates within post-colonial studies. It further looks at the exiling of difference, in George Eliot's Daniel Deronda and the return of the exiled orphan from the colonies to the heart of empire, London, in Dickens's The Mystery of Edwin Drood.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.181 | 0.054 |
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".