MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517503540

Inventing or Recalling the Contact Zones: Transcultural Spaces in Amitav Ghosh's The Shadow Lines

2009· article· en· W1517503540 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nadia Butt

Bibliographic record

VenuePostcolonial text · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSouth Asian Studies and Diaspora
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsThe ImaginaryShadow (psychology)Contact zoneRepresentation (politics)Ethnic groupBengaliPartition (number theory)HistorySpace (punctuation)AestheticsSociologyGenealogyAnthropologyArtPolitical scienceLawPsychoanalysisPhilosophyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Space as a place of contact as well as conflict is an important dimension in the oeuvres of Indian novelist Amitav Ghosh. This paper sets out to address the representation of transcultural in Ghosh's memory novel The Shadow Lines . By recalling and imagining the interplay between private and political lives, Ghosh's narrator/protagonist commemorates a Bengali family saga in post-independence India. By spreading the story over diverse geographical and landscapes in which memory and imagination reinvents historical reality, Ghosh highlights how the shadows of imaginary and remembered spaces haunt all characters in the novel as they struggle to narrate their personal and collective histories to each other. At the same time, these shadows in the form of national boundaries not only manipulate private and political spheres, but also demonstrate an individual's lifelong struggles to win over artificial borders, invading the space of home, territory, and motherland. Thus by examining connectedness and separation, Ghosh uses the fate of nations (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) to offer observations about a profoundly complex political conflict in the post-partition subcontinent between two major ethnic communities of Hindus and Muslims.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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 studies0.0100.023
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePostcolonial textSame topicSouth Asian Studies and DiasporaFrench-language works237,207