Fight for Opportunities or Back to Old Ways: George Eliot's Ambivalent Attitude Towards Female Images in a Patriarchal Society in Adam Bede
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Victorian era in which George Eliot lived was an age of collision between tradition and modernity, an era in which women suffered from craning their necks up to look at men for a long time. Women began to reflect on their own objectification in a patriarchal society, seeking a perspective from which they could stand on equal ground with men. Influenced by bourgeois empirical philosophy, Eliot advocated for harmony and equality of social roles. In this article, it analyzes Dinah, who broke the traditional image of women and chose to preach, but also who finally accepted women's natural occupations and assisted men. Also, there was a character of Hetty, originally created by the author as an object of desire for men, showing a sense of despair. What led the author to create such a contradictory female character - Dinah? And why there was a Hetty with a tragic end? The article aims to respond the novel, Adam Bede, is a product of the limitations and influences of Eliot’s living era, also the realization of Eliot’s willingness to merely reflect people and events in her mind like a mirror, and present images of them flawlessly, mainly through the comparison of two different female roles of Dinah and Hetty, and the comparison of Dinah herself.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".