Bibliographic record
Abstract
<JATS1:p>Theorizes an alternative form of masculinity in global literature that is less egocentric and more sustainable, both in terms of gendered and environmental power dynamics.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>As the #MeToo movement made all too clear, we require new tools for imagining alternative masculinities. Enter Castration Desire: Less Is More in Global Anglophone Fiction, which examines an array of contemporary novelists and filmmakers who are emblematic of a transnational phenomenon that Robinson Murphy calls “castration desire.” Figures such as Japanese-British Kazuo Ishiguro, Irish-Canadian Emma Donoghue, Sri Lankan-Canadian Michael Ondaatje, South Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho, and South African-Australian J.M. Coetzee present privileged characters who nonetheless pursue their own diminishment. Castration Desire examines how, in promulgating through their characters a less egocentric mode of thinking and acting, these transnational artists offer a blueprint for engendering a more other-oriented relationality.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>According to orthodox psychoanalysis, “castration” is always negative: to lose the “phallus” is to lose everything. Against this orthodox account, “castration desire” offers a “less is more” model of sustainable relationality on an imminently eco-apocalyptic earth. Additionally, this study extends and develops a zeitgeist that is currently unfolding in critical theory, bringing Leo Bersani’s concept of “psychic utopia” together with Judith Butler’s “radical egalitarianism,” extending their shared critique of individualistic masculinity into the environmental humanities. Castration Desire thereby provides an alternative to rapacious consumption practices. In shifting criticism to a new way of thinking about the phase of literary history we are currently in, it also helps define where literary criticism is now, and where it is headed.</JATS1:p>
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".