Inversions of the "Survival Myth" in contemporary Canadian narratives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
reputed Canadian critic Northrop Frye (1912-1991) argues that Canada's vast "empty spaces, its largely unknown lakes and rivers and islands, its division of language, its dependence on immense railways to hold it physically together" 4 pose a challenge for the building of one national identity.Furthermore, the "east-west feeling, developed historically along the St. Lawrence-Great Lakes axis" 5 and thus political tensions between east and west complicate the creation of a feeling of a truly united Canadian sense of identity.In addition to the East-West tensions comes the sheer endless North, a mysterious and uncanny backcountry that has both fascinated and terrified residents and inhabitants.6 In the south, Canada borders on the United States, a nation by which the Canadian, as Frye argues, "becomes either hypnotized or repelled".7 Influenced both by the United States and Great Britain, it "is often suggested", as Frye argues, "that Canada's identity is to be found in some via media, or via mediocris, between the other two." 8 Keeping all these factors in mind, it becomes understandable that the issue of the Canadian identity is very sensitive and complex.In the context of this thesis, however, it is important to note that the notions of Canadian identity and Canadian wilderness are inextricably linked.According to Frye, it is not mainly the question "Who am I?" but rather the riddle of "Where is here?"that had a considerable impact on the formation process of the Canadian identity.9 Northrop Frye called it "the mystique of Canadianism" and was convinced that:To feel "Canadian" was to feel part of a no-man's-land with huge rivers, lakes, and islands that very few Canadians had ever seen.[…] One wonders if any other national consciousness has had so large an amount of the unknown, the unrealized, the humanly indigested, so built into it.10 Following Frye's claim of the importance of the "Where is here?"question, it does not come as a surprise that the theme of exploration is frequently found in Canadian literature, as many writers show the efforts to explore, to name and to tame the unfamiliar country they are living in.(Cf.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".