Lonesome Female Character’s Art of Writing Epistles as An Escapism from Aloofness: An Examination of Daddy-Long-Legs by Jean Webster and Dear Rachel Maddow by Adrienne Kisner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An epistle provides a trackway in bringing out the thoughts and emotions of a writer, wherein it helps the sender in conveying information and feelings and kindles the imaginations and sentiments of the receiver as well. An epistolary novel is one such literary work that makes use of messages that have been returned or electronically transmitted to support and enhance its story or exhibit the points of view and innermost feelings of the character(s). The focus of this paper is to showcase that female character(s) in isolation avail epistolary as a personification of a living creature, especially a partner or a friend. The objective of this work is to expose that women in novels take the aid of correspondences and modern communicative tools to break free the desertness and to share their experiences and dark secrets. It takes up two primary sources namely, Daddy-Long-Legs by Jean Webster and Dear Rachel Maddow by Adrienne Kisner to justify its arguments and to attain its objectives. It provides a comparative study of the two select novels to unveil that women characters in novels from the past till date have been using some form of epistles as one of the techniques to get away from their lonely lives. The paper foregrounds itself on the theory of Psycho-Analytic Literary Criticism to support its statements of projecting that women in novels psychologically present themselves through epistolary writings.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".