Sur un étrange héros de l’anti-littérature : les stratégies divergentes de Guy Debord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans son œuvre mémorialiste tardive, Guy Debord offre l’image d’un certain type d’héroïsme littéraire. C’est à partir de l’époque post-révolutionnaire de sa vie que Debord change de stratégie dans le contrôle de la réception de ses productions. Alors que, durant la période situationniste, l’agitation culturelle devait s’organiser dans le secret, la période suivante voit Debord adopter le rôle plus classique de l’« auteur ». Anticipant sa postérité, Debord organise la diffusion posthume de son œuvre tout en peaufinant les dernières images « héroïques » qu’il lèguera de lui-même. Mais cette rupture apparente avec les principes hérités des avant-gardes ne doit pas masquer la singularité de la démarche, qui consiste en une mise en scène inédite de soi par l’entremise d’une dialectique apparition/disparition dans laquelle la littérature ne joue qu’un rôle partiel.AbstractIn his late memorialist works, French writer Guy Debord presents a distinctive image of literary heroism. It’s during the post-revolutionary era of his life that Debord changed his strategy in the control of his works’ reception. Whereas during the situationnist era the cultural revolution ought to be spread in secret, the next period sees Debord adopting the classical function of the “author”. Anticipating his posterity to come, Debord organized the posthumous diffusion of his works while polishing up the ultimate heroic images of himself he would pass on. But this noticeable break with the principles inherited from the avant-gardes should not hide the singularity of Debord’s reasoning, which consists in an original mise en scène of the self by an appearance/disappearance dialectic in which literature only plays a partial part.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".