All the Vulnerable Boys: Child-Saving Conjured in Henrik Ibsen’s <i>Little Eyolf</i> and Hiro Kanagawa’s <i>Indian Arm</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article compares Henrik Ibsen’s 1894 drama Little Eyolf with Indian Arm, an adaptation of Ibsen’s play by Hiro Kanagawa, published in 2016. By focusing on each play’s evocations of fostering, adoption, and other means of “rescuing” children, I argue that they evoke the liberal project of child-saving. Especially when read together, Little Eyolf and Indian Arm call forth the ongoing history of attempting to render children and youth skikkelige [“cultured”] through assimilation into more dominant sectors of society. Kanagawa has recognized that Ibsen’s conclusion might be read as anticipating the Indian Residential School project in the twentieth century, a future that sets the scene for the past that haunts Indian Arm. I also show how Kanagawa uses the spectre of this history of taking children to dramatize his own critique of the settler subject.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".