Myth as the foundation of the narrative in the works of Margaret Atwood.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subject of this research is the works of the famous contemporary Canadian writer Margaret Atwood. The object of the study is their narrative structure. The author of the article characterizes Atwood's narratives as life-descriptive narratives, in which the narrator occupies a central position. The narrator in Atwood's works is usually also the main character. Atwood's texts create a total space for her narrators. One of the foundations for creating a narrative in Atwood's work is myth. Atwood uses ancient Greek, European, and indigenous myths to construct plots. This variety reflects the young Canadian identity, which Atwood herself compares to the mentality of "settlers." In her work with mythological plots, Atwood willingly blends myths of different origins. Drawing on the contributions of both domestic and foreign researchers of Atwood's legacy, as well as Atwood's own literary works, the author of the article describes the place of myth in the structure of Atwood's retrospective, life-descriptive narratives. Narrative, cultural-historical, and cultural-social methods are utilized. The novelty of this research lies in the fact that the author conducts a sequential, in-depth analysis of Atwood's overall approach to myth, whereas most studies on this topic typically focus on how Atwood engages with a specific mythological plot. The author divides Atwood's work with myth into four levels, depending on how heavily Atwood relies on the mythological plot when constructing her own narrative. Thus, Atwood may use myth as the meaning-generating foundation for the entire plot — the first level. Alternatively, Atwood may use an ancient plot to describe national color — the second level. Sometimes myth serves Atwood to discuss the stereotypes of contemporary society — the third level; or to talk about the principles of art — the fourth level.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".