Representations of Monstrous Women and Feminist Myth-Making in Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics (1977-1993)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, I investigate representations of monstrous women in the articles and promotional materials of Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics (1977-1993).Through close reading and textual analysis of Heresies issues, my research reveals that while images of monstrous women in Heresies are drawn from historical representations, they have revisions unique to the magazine.Building on existing scholarship, my research sheds new light on ways in which Heresies' representations of monstrous women are interconnected with feminist concepts of myth-making of the period.I argue that through this process of visual editing and placement, representations of monstrous women are used to deliver feminist messages within a ground-breaking, trailblazing journal during one of the most exciting times in feminist art history.women in Heresies' texts and promotional materials, which revealed articles pertaining to feminist myth-making. Thesis StructureThe following three chapters explore different representations of monstrous women unique to Heresies that appear in the journal's issues and promotional materials.These representations include the hairy girl, the gorgon, and the witch.Each chapter references writings pertaining to feminist myth-making through revision in Heresies and beyond to contextualize the images.Chapter one explores three representations of a hairy girl in Heresies which are used to reflect on reconsiderations of monstrosity and hairiness occurring at the time.Chapter two investigates two representations of Medusa in Heresies in connection with growing discussions of the escalating violence against women during the period.Chapter three examines the revision of three representations of witches which reclaim craft-making, create spaces for women, and encourage women to join the Heresies community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".