The Vampire’s Mirror, a Novel and Accompanying Commentary on Mis/Recognitions of Eastern Europe/ans in British Literature and Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is a creative-critical response to perceptions and representations of Eastern Europe and Eastern Europeans that I term mis/recognitions. It consists of a creative component in the form of a novel, The Vampire’s Mirror (67,000 words), and an accompanying critical commentary entitled “Mis/Recognitions: Staging Eastern Europe in Literature and Culture” (26,000 words). The Vampire’s Mirror employs error as its mechanism of emplotment by dramatizing the predicament of the Eastern European migrant/writer who is often placed in a position of having to account for her cultural and linguistic difference. It tells the story of Ljubitsa Angelova, a Bulgarian translator in an alternative post-Brexit Britain where all forms of translation are under political control. The critical component contextualises the novel in an exploration of the ways in which characters and settings are scripted, produced and known as Eastern European in a broad range of fiction and film from the late nineteenth to the twenty-first centuries as based on a critical framework derived from theorizations of mis/recognition in psychoanalysis, social and political theory, philosophy, and literary and narrative theory. The critical component also examines the writing back strategies I sought to adopt in The Vampire’s Mirror as informed by postcolonial and post-communist literary revisions, literary back-translation, narrative accounting and genre experimentation.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".