Bibliographic record
Abstract
Representations of monstrosity in literature reveal the cultural tensions of specific historical periods, as collective social fears become embodied by creatures intended to disturb their audiences. Gothic novels of the late Victorian Era rely on these representations of darkness in society, and the different monsters created by Victorian authors reflect various views of social norms, particularly in relation to gender. This essay focuses on Bram Stoker’s sexually threatening vampires in Dracula and Robert Louis Stevenson’s physically repulsive representation of the duality of humankind in The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Portrayals of monsters in the late nineteenth century were not limited to literature, but also evident in visual works, such as Aubrey Beardsley’s renderings of Salomé for Oscar Wilde’s publication of a play by the same name. While Stoker’s engagement with monstrosity villainizes female sexual subjectivity, Stevenson’s depiction of corruption questions socially performative masculinity. An analysis of Beardsley’s images emphasizes the potential for sexually subjective female monsters like those in Dracula to contradict social gender norms much like Stevenson’s representation of Mr Hyde, rather than perpetuate the sexual repression of women as Stoker’s novel does. However, the exoticized nature of these drawings also highlights the association between imperial ideologies and representations of gendered monstrosity which both Stoker and Stevenson exhibit as they express anxieties about the colonial other in their texts. Studying these works allows insight into the connections between gender, sexual normativity, and the colonial other that continue to be relevant in contemporary media.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.305 | 0.134 |
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".