Shakespearean Paradigm of Villainies from Hamlet by Shakespeare and Locating Villainies in Modernity and Modern Politics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hamlet by Shakespeare gives rise to discussion on Hamlet's attitude to women, fulfillment of the readers' expectation of justice, connection of Hamlet's death with socio-moral values, impact of the pirate politics of the Elizabethan period on Hamlet, and Hamlet's revenge maintaining morality.But there is an unexplored area of unearthing the nature of the villainies by Claudius and Gertrude to understand the Shakespearean paradigm of villainy and applying the paradigm to locate the villainies of the modern world.Thus, this study aims at exploring how, from the villainies of Claudius and Gertrude in Hamlet, Shakespeare constructs his paradigm of villainy and how, by applying the paradigm, villainies in modernity and modern politics can be located.To conduct this study, the approaches of moral criticism and New Humanism were utilized.The results show that ingratitude, vulgarity, chaos, amoral ambitions and their amoral means, and deceptions, as held by Claudius and Gertrude, construct the Shakespearean paradigm of villainy.By applying this paradigm, villainies have been identified in modernity and modern politics, especially that of the USA.The findings of the research may contribute to enlightening the readers by unmasking the intricate doings of evil both in Hamlet and the modern world.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".