MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570759283 · doi:10.4000/lisa.273

La distanciation dans l’œuvre régionaliste de Grant Wood comme moyen de mise en échec du nationalisme

2009· article· fr· W1570759283 on OpenAlexaff
Kamila Benayada

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue LISA / LISA e-journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismModernism (music)IdeologyAestheticsMythologyRhetoricPaintingNarrativeDefamiliarizationTheme (computing)Representation (politics)Work of artArtLiteratureSociologyArt historyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regionalist painter Grant Wood’s works complied with much of the regionalist ideology as defined by critic Thomas Craven with its nationalism and its rejection of European Modernism. Wood displayed his concern for an American idiom in many of his works. However, while they use pictorial elements that suggest acceptance of the nationalist rhetoric of both Craven and the New Deal art projects, Wood’s works actually show aesthetic preoccupations similar to those of Modernists, and a growing distance from the mythic representations of America often found in regionalist art. While Wood empathises with his countrymen, he also introduces elements within the narrative, and aesthetic elements, that contradict his acceptance of the dominant discourse. Strange, inappropriate and unexpected incursions question the theme and aesthetic affiliation of a work. This deviation, this escape from the frame imposed by Craven and the New Deal, this estrangement, can work as a questioning of America, its values, its myths and its self-representation.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue LISA / LISA e-journalSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207