And the Virus Spread: Infection as a Bond Between William Burroughs’s and David Cronenberg’s Dystopian Works
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation deals with infection in the American Beat Generation author William S. Burroughsand the Canadian film-maker David Cronenberg. I have chosen Burroughs’s Cut-Up trilogy (formed by The Soft Machine, The Ticket That Exploded and Nova Express) and Cronenberg’s Crimes of the Future, Shivers and Rabid as my main frames of reference to carry out this study. The main purpose of this comparative analysis (which is not exempt of similarities and differences in the way these two authors tackle the same subject matter) is to explore a research gap in order to shed some light to the means by which the two authors perceive infection and parasitism as ever-present elements in theirworks that provides them with philosophical ideas that go well beyond the genres which they seem to be ascribed to on the surface. It will be seen how labels fall short to explain these two authors given the roughly experimental nature of their methods.As a conclusion, my research is also concerned with sex and monstrosity in both authors as a direct result of infection.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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".