MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2318275844 · doi:10.1177/002070201006500218

Review: The Constant Diplomat <i>Robert Ford in Moscow</i>

2010· article· en· W2318275844 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
JH Taylor

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMemoirAnecdoteSoviet unionPoetryLawHistoryPoliticsArt historyClassicsEconomic historyPolitical scienceArtLiterature

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

THE CONSTANT DIPLOMAT Robert Ford in Moscow Charles A. Ruud Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queeris, 303PP, $39.95 cloth ISBN 9780-773535855Robert Ford, diplomat and poet, retired from the Canadian embassy in Moscow in 1980. By then, notwithstanding a serious physical disability, he had survived in the Soviet capital for more than 20 years, 16 as ambassador. He had received the governor general's award for poetry and had been made a companion of the order of Canada for his public service. Among western governments, he was considered an outstanding expert on the Soviet Union.When he retired, Ford had certain ideas about how the record of his long service was to be treated. Apart from his poetry (ultimately published in seven volumes) he wrote two books. The first, Our Man in Moscow. A Diplomat's Reflections on the Soviet Union, appeared in 1989. Ford conceived of this study as falling between a diplomatic memoir and an academic work. It is serious, close to academic in tone and substance, enlivened by the occasional anecdote, but on the whole impersonal. At the same time, apart from an index, it has no scholarly apparatus. Our Man in Moscow was designed to cover the greater part of Ford's professional life. In 1995, this time with considerable editorial assistance, he published a second book. A Moscow Literary Memoir. Among the Great Artists of Russia from 1946 to ic)8o dealt with the other dimension of his life in the Soviet Union - his many contacts with Soviet intellectuals, and in particular, the poets Yevgeny Yevtushenko and Andrei Voznesensky, and the aged Lili Brik, once Mayakovsk/s mistress.Yet there remained another source of his writing he wanted published. This was contained in the dispatches and memoranda he had prepared over the years for the Department of External Affairs, on file in Ottawa. He believed these official documents would make a third book, this time in a scholarly edition prepared by a qualified historian. He pursued this project with determination during his lifetime. Now, more than 10 years after his death, it has been realized with the publication of The Constant Diplomat by Charles A. Ruud of the University of Western Ontario.Ruud is a specialist in Russian history. His book is based upon research in primary sources in both the Canadian and Russian official archives, as well as on secondary sources. In addition, he had extensive conversations with Ford and interviewed a number of the ambassador's friends. He has produced a study of over 300 pages, of which some 85 are devoted to appendices, endnotes, a bibliography, and an index. In form and style, then, Ruud's work seems to be very much what the ambassador had in mind. The author says, however, that his concept was different from his subject's. He may have concluded that an analysis of Ford's official writings alone would not have made a book. (The chapters devoted to summarizing and commenting on the dispatches run to only about 125 pages.) However that may be, Ruud has added biographical material on Robert Ford's childhood in London, Ontario, his education at Western and Cornell, and his life in retirement, as well as most of a chapter on the ambassador's wife, Thereza, a chapter on Ford's contacts with Soviet intellectuals, and a chapter on his Soviet counterpart in Ottawa, Alexander Yakovlev. These additional elements add colour and interest to the book. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,016
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,055

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0050,005
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0160,013

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,298
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisMême sujetCanadian Identity and HistoryTravaux en français237 207