Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Refusing the Role, Embracing the Hole Joshua Whitehead (bio) Allan, Jonathan A. Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus, U of Regina P, 2016. 249 pp. $34.95 hc. ISBN 9780889773844. Jonathan Allan's Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus is a timely addition to sexuality, gender, affect, queer, psychoanalysis, and cultural studies. Allan probes what the anus signifies through a variety of cultural texts and theoretical genealogies. I write this in the aftermath of the feuding derrières of Kim Kardashian and Nicki Minaj attempting to "break the Internet" and the barrage of "booty selfies" emerging from the likes of Justin Bieber, Orlando Bloom, and Nyle DiMarco. This rise in visibility of the ass has led to popular media companies such as Vogue and The New York Times publishing on "belfies" (a combination of "butt" and selfie" [Connor]), to the rise in cosmetic surgeries involving the butt (Meltzer), to the virality of what I would call anal horror in films such as the [End Page 169] Human Centipede trilogy, through to bell hooks leading a panel entitled "Whose Booty Is This?" And in the wake of RuPaul's Drag Race becoming mainstream, I cannot not hear All-Stars winner Alaska Thunderfuck telling me "anus thing is possible" while writing this review. It then comes at no surprise that we are baring witness to the hyperpopularization of all things anal in our current cultural productions. Allan grounds us in all things anal by reminding us that the anus was, and remains, a site of contestation and surrounds itself with affects that include shame, anxiety, fear, and paranoia. He argues that the anus works to orient sexualities, calling it "the very ground zero of gayness" (8). In his introduction, "No Wrong Doors: An Entryway" he asks if there are methods to "engage the anus but not fall victim to a hermeneutics of suspicion, a paranoid, anxious, or nervous reading practice, one that always insists on a certain orientation?" (9). Allan insists that in order to read from behind, we must procure a blend of theoretics to shift our optics from our phallocentric trainings to this very ground zero from which he asks us to peek. Producing a methodology for reading from the bottom, Allan aligns himself closely with the work of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, primarily her essay "Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading; or, You're So Paranoid, You Probably Think This Essay is About You." Reading from Behind seeks to reset the affective interpolations of the anus in its homophobic and effeminophobic understandings to produce a new kind of reading, one motivated by the reparative and its unknowing. This new methodology works within the boundaries (re: buttocks) of affects, both negative and positive, to "negotiate our relations to these affects, thinking through the complicated and complex ways in which affect informs idea … it is worthwhile to benefit from the tension" (14). In doing so, Allan affords us a rich and complex constellation of readings by highlighting those affects that make us uncomfortable in texts we hold dear, in order to further our understanding that "[t]he anus is remarkably rich with hermeneutic potential, and critical theory has done a disservice to its complexity by privileging the phallic referent" (70). In the first chapter, "Anal Theory, or Reading from Behind," Allan expands the scope of his methodology. "The anus," he writes, "is an opening to the text that has remained obscured by critical, intellectual, and affective anxieties that have not permitted readers the chance to engage with the other side of textuality" (6). Reading from Behind seeks to make the phallus peripheral in order to hone in on a median ground we all share. For the anus, Allan notes, "is inherently inclusive" (17) and vastly complex in its significations across race, orientation, sex, sexuality, ethnicity, and so on. Attempting to universalize the anus, to remove it from its ground zero and significations with gay men, we are asked "[w]hat does the ass, the rectum, the anus mean for masculinity, for the male body?" (28). To flesh out his provocation, Allan recruits Eric Anderson's conceptions of "homohysteria" to return us to a place of paranoia and...
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,014 | 0,030 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,017 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,004 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».