Grand écart identitaire. Le politique et l'esthétique dans le surréalisme français. Trois moments : 1935, 1947, 1969
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé
 Sous la désignation de « grand écart identitaire », on s’est proposé d’analyser -- du point de vue de l’histoire des idées, à trois époques précises : 1931, 1947, 1969 et sur des citations précises, souvent peu connues -- les positions politiques et esthétiques du groupe surréaliste français qui entoure André Breton. Loin de l’image pourtant ingénieuse employée par Régis Debray (« l’honneur des funambules »), ces analyses font apparaître le détail de stratégies complexes, parfois un certain déni de réalité mais aussi une leçon poétique de grande facture et l’esquisse d’une anthropologie politique – apte à faire réfléchir bien des politologues aujourd’hui.
 
 Mots clés: Groupe surréaliste, André Breton, histoire des idées, esthétique et politique.
 
 Abstract
 From the position of the history of ideas, and using the concept of “important divisions of identification”, this article will analyze the political and esthetic positions of the French surrealist group surrounding André Breton at three precise periods: in 1931, 1947 and 1969. Far from the albeit ingenious image used by Régis Debray (“l’honneur des funambules”), these analyses highlight the details of complex strategies, sometimes a certain refusal of reality, but also an important poetic lesson and the trace of a political anthropology – apt to give pause to many political scientists today.
 
 Key words : Surrealist movement, André Breton, history of ideas, esthetics and politics.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it