“The lunatic, the lover, and the poet”: ambiguous three-way authorship in Neil Gaiman’s<i>Sandman #19</i>, “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the interchangeable relationship between three author figures in the nineteenth individual instalment of Neil Gaiman’s popular Sandman comic book, titled ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’, arguing that just as this metafictional story blurs the boundaries between theatrical/comic book fiction and reality, it also portrays an abstraction of authorship between Shakespeare, Morpheus, and Gaiman, as each figure blends into one another while influencing the shape of the narrative; as a result, each of these authors demonstrates the tangible and transformative power of a singular storyteller. Drawing from Gaiman’s history of portraying Shakespeare in Sandman – and his goal throughout the series of enshrining single impactful authorship through his fictionalised take on Shakespeare – I will propose that in actuality, all three authors engage in a cyclical creative relationship with one another, which affects the perception of the comic book story’s origin, with each author acting as inspiration for one another on both a diegetic and metatextual level. This culminates in the story’s visual layout and meta-performance of Dream, in which their three authorial influences become momentarily indistinguishable, complicating Gaiman’s ideal of single authorship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".