L'ironie "à rebours" dans "Le sexe des étoiles" de Monique Proulx
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes an analysis of the irony in the metafeminist novel Le sexe des étoiles by the Quebec author Monique Proulx. The irony presents itself in multiple ways, but especially by the presence of several narrative voices, creating ironic re-readings of the novel. Using the theories of irony and sarcasm of Hutcheon and Duval and Martinez, this paper lists the various ironic procedures at work in Proulx's novel. It also explores how the narration of Le sexe des étoiles is exponentially ironic with the help of Bakhtine's polyphony theory. Hence, it is possible to state that a re-reading based on the narrative voices creates a reverse irony, which can only be discovered by the reader at the end of the story. The study of the ironic forms of Le sexe des étoiles reveals that Proulx's novel is indeed an ironic and critical novel about 1980s Quebec. The analysis of polyphony in the novel also reveals Proulx's play with her alleged authors within the story. This narrative form accentuates the irony and the criticism revealed in the various voices within Proulx's work. The novel is thus constructed as an ironic criticism of its time by using various ironic and satirical methods, but it is by this complex and twisted narration that Proulx's novel manages to fool its reader.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".