Erfaringens form: Svak narrativ identitetskonstruksjon i Rachel Cusks Outline.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the relationship between personal identity and literary form in Canadian-British Rachel Cusk’s novel Outline and in her autobiographical memoirs about motherhood and divorce, A Life’s Work and Aftermath. Part of the main argument in the thesis is that the title of the novel – Outline – is a metafictional reference to a meta-autobiographical form of narrative identity construction that stands out as a creative alternative to more conventional narrative identity constructions of the kinds that are normally associated with the form of the traditional, Western autobiography. This alternative narrative form is investigated in relation to Cusk’s published poetics about a female form of literature and Brian McHale and Pekka Tammi’s notion of weak narrativity. The novel Outline’s weak narrative form inaugurates a structure for experimentally probing into and attaining new self-knowledge in a manner which is clearly attentive to the liminal and ambivalent experience of living in a female body. However, while topics and devices explored in Outline in this respect resonate with and are shared in Cusk's autobiographical memoirs, yet the unique narrative form developed in the novel fundamentally appears as a structure for self-knowledge open to both genders. The close link between the exploration of female experience through literary form in Cusk’s memoirs and Outline’s novelistic literary form thus leads to an ontological universalization of femininity in Outline, all of which makes Cusk’s expressed poetics about a female literary form appear as the materialization of a form for human experience – for humanity. In the perspective of the thesis, human search for existential insight into experience, and especially its thrust for a better and more productive knowledge of the self and identity, in Outline openly pays heed to and welcomes hitherto unknown parts of the self – also those immersed in darkness and which might never be fully known, yet that regardless constitute the “groundless ground” of the self.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".