An abhumanist dystopia: the case of J. D. Kurtness and Christiane Vadnais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En):The apocalyptic thread underlies the works of many Quebec writers, and more recently it runs through the dystopian theme that announces the dark future of man and civilisation.It is obvious that apocalypse and dystopia present the two sides of humanism which, in the wake of Christianity, sees man as a superior being, the one that opposes culture to nature.Is there an alternative to this dichotomous axiology?Some recent trends in dystopian literature seem to point the way by blurring or erasing the human component and establishing an abhumanist axiology where nature alone imposes the scale of values.What are the particularities of this specific ethos?What does it consist of?These are the questions we will try to answer by presenting two recent dystopias -Aquariums (2019) by J. D. Kurtness and Faunes (2018) by Christiane Vadnais -which seem to stand out by their abhumanist ethos from apocalypses and dystopias of the majority discourse.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| 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".