MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014681617

Political fanaticism, alienation and the Trickster archetype in Guillermo Del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth and Terry Gilliam’s Tideland

2022· dissertation· en· W7014681617 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueoURspace (University of Regina) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicJungian Analytical Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuminousTricksterFanaticismDepictionArchetypeAnalytical psychologyPoliticsAlienationIndividuation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis uses Jungian and post-Jungian methods of textual analysis as a methodological approach to analyze two fairytale films produced at the beginning of the twenty-first century, Guillermo del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth (2006) and Terry Gilliam’s Tideland (2005). Based on del Toro’s artistic rendering of the Spanish Civil War and Gilliam’s depiction of the Canadian prairies as an isolated and hostile landscape, it will be argued that political fanaticism and alienation are, from a Jungian psychological perspective, symptomatic of a modern mode of being that divests individuals of the numinous dimensions of existence. And since Jungian psychology formulates the numinous as a category of subjective experiences vis-à-vis the Self (Edinger, 1972), it follows, the thesis argues, that political fanaticism and alienation result from an attitude of neglect towards internal psychological processes and the unconscious. In this line of reasoning, the thesis further argues that the Trickster manifests in these films as a figure of remediation, which brings forth the importance of individuation as a means to rediscover the numinous through a dialogical relationship with the unconscious.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.015
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueoURspace (University of Regina)Same topicJungian Analytical PsychologyFrench-language works237,207