Mythological Celebrities: A Prolegomena to the Study of Retellings of GreekMyths in Polish Prose of the Last Quarter Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article serves as an introduction to the study of contemporary Polish retellings of Greek myths,with particular emphasis on works from the past quarter-century. Using the novels of Monika Magoska-Suchar, Katarzyna Tkaczyk, and Małgorzata Lisińska as case studies, the analysis focuseson how mythological narratives are reconfi gured within the frameworks of romance, erotic fi ction,and new adult literature. Special attention is given to the transformation of gender representations,the eroticisation of trauma, and the deheroisation of male fi gures. Rather than revising myths,the authors adapt them to the demands of the contemporary publishing market, offering simplifi eddepictions of masculinity and femininity shaped by consumerist logic and strategies of audienceshock. The article highlights the need for a critical reflection on the function of myth in popularculture.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".