MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1637768364

“A Half-Understood Massiveness”: Revisiting John Newlove’s “The Pride”

2013· article· en· W1637768364 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
J.A. Weingarten

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Canadian Literature · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPridePoetryAllusionContext (archaeology)LiteratureSophisticationColonialismHistoryComposition (language)AestheticsSociologyArtPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

John Newlove’s poem “The Pride” appeared in 1964 at a pivotal juncture in the development of Canadian literature and of prairie writing in particular. The poem demonstrated that a poetic treatment of the prairies and its history could be both aesthetically and thematically rich without misrepresenting the cultural or historical conditions of the region. “The Pride” is read here in the context of its composition, its modernist influences, and its use of allusion; contributing to the sophistication and multivocality of the poem are references to T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land and to the historical writings of G.E. Hyde and David Thompson. Hyde’s unsympathetic portrayal of culture being negatively affected by colonialism and Thompson’s more sympathetic observations inform a clash of perspectives in Newlove’s poem. The speaker comes to regard the prairie past, like Eliot’s wasteland of allusions, as a “half-understood massiveness” that needs more diverse historical and literary perspectives.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.038
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Canadian LiteratureSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207