MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401868996 · doi:10.1111/glal.12426

THE CRISIS OF SOCIABILITY AND LAUGHTER IN THOMAS MANN'S <i>DER ZAUBERBERG</i>

2024· article· en· W4401868996 on OpenAlexaff
Dante S. Prado

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Life and Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicGerman Literature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaughterPsychoanalysisPsychologyPhilosophySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The article explores the significance of laughter in Thomas Mann's Der Zauberberg. While laughter is a prominent feature in the novel, it has not received sufficient critical consideration either in Mann scholarship or, more generally, in studies of modernism. Through close examination of selected episodes of laughter, this study establishes the importance of laughter in the novel, both quantitatively and qualitatively. The analysis examines the extent to which the representation of laughter in the novel conforms to or deviates from recent characterisations of laughter in modernist texts. While certain interpretations of modernist laughter as disruptive and/or pathological can be applied to this text, this is not entirely true of its use in Der Zauberberg. Rather, the significance of laughter shifts constantly throughout the novel, culminating in a crisis of laughter that is part of a larger crisis of sociability and ‘Bildung’. The novel suggests that laughter formerly played a critical role in fostering communication, sociability, self‐awareness, and civility. In contrast, the crisis of laughter towards the end of the novel invites reflection on the loss of these social and humane functions. The crisis of laughter in Der Zauberberg, I argue, is of particular relevance to the interpretation of laughter in other modernist novels which engage in critical dialogue with the ‘Bildungsroman’ tradition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerman Life and LettersSame topicGerman Literature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207