MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7165855560 · doi:10.66121/9e8db662

Intertextuality in Margaret Atwood’s The Robber Bride

2022· article· W7165855560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Muthulakshmi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntertextualityMythologyPower (physics)Identity (music)PoliticsPatriarchyMale gaze

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Margaret Atwood is the first major author of Canada to envision a new woman as self-cognizant, self-governing and searching to acquire an identity of her own. As a versatile genius, Atwood through her novel explores the condition of women and their status in the Canadian patriarchal society. She portrayed women as both victims and avengers in her works. In her fiction and poetry, she often employed Canadian and Universal myths to portray the female/human predicament. Her works are often known for their intertextuality, The Robber Bride uses intertextuality like Triple Goddess and The Three Little Pigs. This article attempts to study Atwood’s The Robber Bride (1993) in the light of intertextuality. Zenia, the protagonist of the novel is a whore who rebels against male sexual politics in a patriarchal society. She rejects society’s view of fallen women, oppressed by male and uses her body as a weapon to humiliate men. Her strength is the power of female sexuality. She traps men, seduces them and then, abandons them. Zenia is a homeless, demonic woman who wants to revolt against male hegemony.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0250.022
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionFrench-language works237,207