“Booby's fruitless operations”: The Crisis of Male Authority in Richardson's <i>Pamela</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critics have read Mr B.'s failure to rape Pamela either as evidence of his sexual impotence and Richardson's authorial incompetence or as a testament to the power of Pamela's heroically resistant voice. In contrast, I argue that Mr B.'s inability to acquit himself as a rake is crucially linked to his desire to silence Pamela's narrative. While he fails to penetrate her body, he ultimately succeeds at insinuating a competing narrative within her epistolary text—a narrative that highlights his own discursive powerlessness and depicts her writing as an act of sexualized boldness. Mr B.'s counter-narrative allows him both to redirect his erotic pursuit and to supplant Pamela's story with his own. As his professions of weakness become his means of co-opting and reforming Pamela's writing, Mr B.'s rhetorical tactics anticipate Richardson's own strategic self-diminution as he publishes Pamela alongside—and in opposition to—female-authored romances.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".