Reading Ambivalence: Order, Progress and Female Transgression in "La insólita historia de la Santa de Cabora" by Brianda Domecq
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este art?culo analiza la novela mexicana La ins?lita historia de la Santa de Cabora (1990J de Brianda Domecq. La novela narra la historia de la curandera Teresa Urrea (la Santa de Cabora), acusada de actividades subversivas y perse guida por el r?gimen de Porfirio D?az a fines del siglo XIX. Las interpretaciones cr?ticas alrededor del personaje de Teresa lo destacan como s?mbolo de resisten cia, personaje progresista, contribuci?n positiva a la tradici?n literaria femeni na en M?xico. Sin embargo, esta noci?n de ejemplaridad, entendida en el texto como transgresi?n femenina, debe cuestionarse. En este art?culo procuro demos trar que la supuesta transgresi?n de Teresa se desmantela por completo a trav?s de otros discursos textuales que se examinan aqu?: la representaci?n de Porfirio D?az como modelo de conducta para Teresa, el establecimiento de jerarqu?as de clase representado a trav?s de Teresa y el car?cter apol?tico de su curanderismo. Estos discursos ayudan a crear una visi?n muy distinta del personaje, una visi?n que socava de manera radical su posici?n como s?mbolo de la transgresi?n. Se analiza tambi?n la tensi?n producida por estas interpretaciones conflictivas dentro del contexto de la cr?tica literaria feminista actual.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".