Représentations des subalternités, de la ligne de couleur et du genre dans les romans et récits mémoriels mauriciens et réunionnais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colonial novels try to represant more precisely the Colored people than exotic literature. As colonial museum, Ulysse cafre ou l’histoire dorée d’un Noir written by Marius-Ary Leblond and Ameenah written by Clément Charoux expose colony, its functioning and natives. These colonials mauritians and reunioneses novelists use naturalism style to describe the intimate of races, genius of races. Marius-Ary Leblond say that they are better able to teach insular world than exotic literature. Colored people representations provoke legitimate conflict. In colonial novels, colored women, (Indians, black, “cafrine” , metis) are regarded as racial Other and gendered Other. They are subaltern of white narrators and heros. Conversely, in postcolonial women mauritian and reunionese novels, (Á l’autre bout de moi written by Marie-Thérèse Humbert, Rouge Cafrine written by Véronique Bourkoff and Femme sept peaux written by Monique Séverin) female narrators and heroines criticize continued colonial ideology, which still goes on in societies that were colonized. They give different visions of colored women, enough to represent themselves, to analyze themselves and observe postcolonial society. They still filled with stereotypes and colonialist, phallocrate, orientalist discourses. These rhetorics destroy their identity. Paradoxaly, complex, heterogeneous and multiple identities of female narrators figure into more novelistic fiction than autobiography. However, autobiography is supposed to account for true female narrator’s identity. This way, mauritian autobiography and reunionese autobiography are deconstructed in the texts of our corpus: Miettes et Morceaux written by Eileen Lohka, Letan lontan written by Rada Gungaloo, Tête Haute written by Mémona Hintermann and La Magie de Siva Desiles an autobiographic music hall written by Jasmine Desiles
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".