Генологічні аспекти романів М. Етвуд «Історія служниці», «Орикс і Крейк» та «Рік потопу» \n(«Genological Aspects of Margaret Atwood’s Novels The Handmaid’s Tale, Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood»)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
У статті проаналізовано жанрові дефініції антиутопії й дистопії у зіставленні з літературною утопією та \nзапропоновано визначення центрального жанру романів «Історія Служниці», «Орикс і Крейк» та «Рік Потопу». \n(rake and The Year of the Flood» The article analyses the problem of genre definition of Margaret Atwood’s novels The Handmaid’s Tale (1985), Oryx and Crake (2003) and The Year of the Flood (2009). Since the 1980–s Canadian writer Margaret Atwood has been raising the \nburning issues of nowadays, underlying the problems of totalitarianism, authoritarian mind, theocratic fundamentalism, the consequences of scientific experiments, power, freedom, colonization, apocalyptic catastrophic, the problems of women in a patriarchal \nsociety, the environment and so on. Therefore, her literary works combine features of different genres and her novels The Handmaid’s Tale, Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood are not exceptions. Western scholars (Mouda A. S., Kouhestani M., Bouson J. B., Howells C. A., Cole A, Freeman J. and so on) mostly define the main genre of the above mentioned texts as dystopia. Nevertheless, some Ukrainian literary critics classify these novels as anti-utopias, since this term is more common to be used for such kind of texts. Furthermore, scholars Baccolini R., Labudová K., Wilson S. R. etc. underline the presence of both utopian and dystopian features, which Raffaella Baccolini from her perspective regards as a sign of a critical dystopia. \nMargaret Atwood, on the other hand, defines such combination of utopian and dystopian genres in her novels The Handmaid’s Tale, Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood as ustopia. The term ‘ustopia’ which first appeared in Atwood’s book In Other Worlds: SF and the Human Imagination (2011) is used by the author to denote the imagined perfect society and its opposite.)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".