MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249830180 · doi:10.29173/jjs94s

The Primitive in Othello:

2005· article· en· W4249830180 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew A. Fike

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Jungian Scholarly Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicJungian Analytical Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchetypePsycheLiteraturePremiseContext (archaeology)PhilosophyCriticismIndividuationRhetoricSubject (documents)AestheticsArtPsychoanalysisEpistemologyHistoryPsychologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Previous Jungian criticism of Othello overlooks the primitive, treats it as an obvious premise, or does not consider it in the context of Jung’s extensive and widely varied statements on the subject. This essay deepens the archetypal approach by discussing the play in terms of the primitive mentality that ultimately thwarts Othello’s individuation. When Jung’s racist rhetoric is subjected to postcolonial critique, what emerges is the helpful concept of the psychologically archaic—areas of the psyche that are less conscious and less differentiated. A post-Jungian emphasis on the archaic then illuminates Desdemona’s attraction to the Moor; war, fetishism, and the supernatural; and the signifying process surrounding the handkerchief. In addition, Jung’s “four stages of eroticism” (feminine archetypes) enhance the significance of the sibyl, an archaic figure with civilizing influence. Shakespeare’s use of the primitive culminates in Othello’s final comparison of himself to two primitives (Indian and Turk), and he dies a broken man—aware that projection has caused his downfall.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Jungian Scholarly StudiesSame topicJungian Analytical PsychologyFrench-language works237,207