Making Fun of Sport: James Fitzmaurice, Robert Ripley, and the Art of Sport Cartooning in Vancouver, 1907-1918
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study looks at the emergence of newspaper sport cartooning in the early twentieth century through a comparison of the parochial images of Vancouver British Columbia cartoonist James Fitzmaurice and the syndicated American sports cartoons of Robert Ripley. The study examines the working lives of the best known American sport cartoonists and then focuses on the work of Vancouver Province staff cartoonist James B. Fitzmaurice during the prewar period and how these images grew out of local experience. With the arrival of the syndicated sports cartoons of New York City cartoonist Robert Ripley in 1914, Vancouver readers are given “world of sport” images that differed from the more eclectic visual meanings tied to local experience that characterized Fitzmaurice’s work. This study suggests that the contrast between Fitzmaurice and Ripley marks the difference between two levels of sport culture consumption and that visual culture acted as an important conduit for the growth of shared international sport consciousness.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".