Exploring relational dynamics of Grace Marks in Margaret Atwood’s Alias Grace through relational-cultural theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considered one of the most esteemed contemporary authors in Canada and the twentieth century, Margaret Atwood’s ninth novel Alias Grace is a historical fiction based on a real murder case that occurred in nineteenth-century Canada. This study explores the relational dynamics of the protagonist, Grace Marks, with her fellow servants Mary Whitney and Nancy Montgomery through the lens of Relational-Cultural Theory (RCT). Founded by psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Jean Baker Miller, RCT posits that humans are inherently relational and grow only through mutual connections across the lifespan. RCT considers the Western ideal of an independent, self-sufficient individual harmful, as it fosters isolation and disrupts mutuality. Additionally, patriarchal and classist structures are criticized as they reinforce hierarchy, control, inequality, and power-over dynamics, hindering the potential growth-fostering relationships. Through close textual analysis, this article indicates that Grace’s connection with Mary embodies five outcomes of a growth-fostering relationship. In contrast, Grace’s connection with Nancy is marked by chronic disconnections, resulting in the reversal of five good things: decreased energy, an inability to take action, a low sense of worth, confusion, and isolation. By portraying Grace’s relational experiences, the study also elucidates how the male-dominated and hierarchical society of the nineteenth century obstructs the potential growth-fostering relationships for her because within this society, mutuality and empathy are often replaced by fear and control. Therefore, Grace adopts strategies of disconnection to protect herself, but they also deepen her isolation. Viewed through the lens of RCT, Alias Grace becomes more than a narrative of crime and mystery, given its focus on the transformative potential of growth-fostering relationships and the detrimental effects of disconnections on psychological growth, particularly for women living within restrictive social systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".