Bibliographic record
Abstract
WHAT COULD REASONABLY be asked of film produced in 1999 on the Winnipeg General Strike? It should reflect the current state of the historiography; should be sensitive to the discourse deployed by the participants in the strike and those who commented in 1919 and later — including historians; should invite the viewer to approach the strike with an open yet analytical perspective; and finally should avoid simple-minded narratives, gratuitous assessments, or dubious conclusions. Measured by such criteria, Prairie Fire fizzles. Producers Audrey Mehler and David Paperny ask remarkably few questions of the events they portray, presenting the strike as unique, localized and ephemeral explosion — a time of in the words of consultant David Bercuson. The focus is, indeed, on excitement as the film is preoccupied with the violent denouement of the strike — Bloody Saturday— to the detriment of creative or analytical thinking about its popularity, meaning and outcome. Never exploring the character or scope of the challenge to the social order, the film trivializes the strike. Why did tens of thousands of working-class Winnipeggers join the walkout? Prairie Fire gives no response to this question. Narrator Ann Medina explains that it began as fight for workers' rights, but such fights were and are commonplace. Few explode into the generalized confrontation of 1919. The filmmakers appear unaware of the geographical extent of the post-World War I national and international labour revolt and so assume that the source of the conflict has to be found in Winnipeg itself. But even here, they do not look very hard. The film examines some specific confrontations earlier in the century such as the 1906 street railway strike, but such contests, along with the neighbourhood mobilizations that they provoked, were ubiquitous across the continent. The poverty of north-end Winnipeg is portrayed, but there is no explanation of why poverty may provoke resistance rather than resignation. The important ethnic mixture of the city is described, but the significance of ethnicity in the strike itself is all but ignored. The existence of
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.005 |
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".