Wondrous Hauntings in Eden Robinson's <em>Monkey Beach</em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Why Indigenous Literatures Matter (2018), Cherokee author Daniel Heath Justice suggests the term “wonderwork” as a useful alternative to “speculative fiction” or “fantastic literature”, to describe Indigenous creative works that convey “meaningful ways of experiencing this and other worlds” beyond dualistic notions of real and unreal. In Justice’s formulation, Indigenous wonderworks counter colonial deficit narratives and inspire radical hope by envisioning alternative futures. Hope does not deny struggle, and it can be a driving force even in texts in which trauma is foregrounded, as in Monkey Beach (2000), the debut novel of Haisla/Heiltsuk author Eden Robinson. Set in the evocative landscapes of British Columbia, enlivened by talking crows, forest spirits, b’gwus, and other more-than-human beings, the novel incorporates Indigenous epistemologies while engaging with and subverting the conventions of the Euro-Canadian Gothic tradition. If Indigenous ghosts have long been a part of a white settler Canadian narrative of dominance – with Indigenous presence spectralized to justify land theft and to enforce a sense of loss and deficit – the ghostly figures in Robinson’s novel oppose colonial tropes and the Gothic’s discourses of pity, absence and terror. Robinson conveys the haunting legacy of residential schools through silences, narrative gaps, and intergenerational echoes of colonial violence, but her ghosts are never merely allegories of trauma. Instead, they embody kinship, knowledge, more-than-human agency, and a profound sense of wonder, engaging Lisa in reciprocal relationships that demand responsibility, interpretation, and care. Drawing from Daniel Heath Justice’s theorization of wonderworks as an antidote to despair, as well as Haisla critical perspectives on wonder, this paper examines how Monkey Beach challenges narratives of Indigenous absence and loss, offering instead a vision of presence, interconnectedness, and radical hope.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".