"How Will They Ever Heal . . .?" Bearing Witness to Abuse and the Importance of Female Community in Sarah Daniels's Beside Herself, Head-Rot Holiday , and The Madness of Esme and Shaz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In her three women-and-madness plays, Beside Herself, Head-Rot Holiday , and The Madness of Esme and Shaz , Sarah Daniels presents conflicting views of female madness. While she is critical of a society that labels women's anger or refusal to conform as madness, she goes beyond the simplistic view of women's madness as misogyny to show the severe psychological pain suffered by women who have been the victims of verbal, physical, and particularly, sexual abuse. Healing from this type of abuse, Daniels suggests, is only possible through homosocial bonds with other women. Moments where women remain silenced and even complicit in the patriarchal systems and cycles of abuse that oppress, harm, and stifle all women are contrasted in these plays with those moments in which there is potential for change through speech and through women's support of one another, and it is through this contrast, through both the presence and the absence or subversion of testimony and community in these plays, that Daniels appeals to her audience and stresses that the only way forward for women who have endured such trauma is the establishment of an attentive and supportive female community.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".