MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162110750 · doi:10.82308/13554

Fantasy as a peripheral modernism: uneven development in Charles de Lint's Urban Fantasy

2016· dissertation· en· W7162110750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Rettino

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGothic Literature and Media Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFantasyInnocenceAlienationDystopiaSublimeRomanceModernism (music)MAGIC (telescope)The SymbolicRealism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern fantasy must be analyzed as a modernist literature that posits a critical gesture of refusal of the conditions of modernity. As a form of irrealism, a category that includes Gothic and magic realism, fantasy claims to represent a deeper realism even if it uses non-realist techniques to do so. The combined and uneven capitalist world-system inscribes itself in the urban fantasy of Charles de Lint, which as a peripheral modernism combines residual forms and folkloric, non-modern content within the realist novel. This symbolic act allegorizes 'the synchronicity of the non-synchronous,' a principal condition of modernity. In de Lint's novel Moonheart, the uneven relationship between colonizer and colonized becomes symbolically resolved through its utopian romance structure, despite the incapability of the Canadian state's policy of multiculturalism to redress First Nations inequality. Mulengro expands the Gothic horror of a Rom superstition into a diagnosis of the general conditions of alienation that haunt modern capitalist society. In Dreams Underfoot, de Lint's short story collection, fantasy represents the unevenness of cities, where the right to the urban life is at stake within the sublime urban totality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGothic Literature and Media AnalysisFrench-language works237,207