Playing on the Expectations: Seth’s <i>It’s a Good Life, If You Don’t Weaken</i> (1993–1996) as Graphic Autofiction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The article revises the well-established reading of the Canadian author and artist Seth’s first graphic novel It’s a Good Life, If You Don’t Weaken (1993–1996) as autofiction, employing a more recent theorization on autofiction and the autofictional (that is, autofictional pact and strategies of counterfactuality). Seth consciously constructs his narrative identity, exploiting generic conventions and respective social expectations, which arise at the turn of the twenty-first century in light of the rising popularity of confessional writing in American alternative comics. Within the scope of this article, I touch upon the pragmatic of authorial self-articulation, that is, manipulation of architextual relations by means of his pseudonym, professional label, and genre elements, as well as the functional analysis of the binary system of characters. The study suggests the importance of differentiating between the fictional and referential in autofiction in order to preserve the autofictional equilibrium of establishment and subversion of authenticity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".