Le groupe surréaliste de Bucarest entre Paris et Bruxelles, 1945-1947 : une page d’histoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé : Le conflit qui eut lieu en 1947, par voie épistolaire et à coup d’expositions, entre—d’une part—le groupe surréaliste de Bucarest et le peintre surréaliste bruxellois, René Magritte, et—d’autre part—celui-ci et André Breton, chef de file du groupe surréaliste de Paris, est considéré ici comme révélateur d’une des multiples tensions qui ont traversé le mouvement surréaliste international. Au lendemain de la seconde guerre mondiale, par l’affrontement de sensibilités divergentes et de rhétoriques fort marquées, ce bref épisode témoigne d’un des moments les plus névralgiques de l’histoire européenne. En reconstituant cet épisode à partir du groupe bucarestois, encore peu connu, l’article le présente aux lecteurs. Mots-clés : Surréalisme, Infra-Noir, Gherasim Luca, Paul Păun, Victor Brauner, Seconde guerre mondiale, André Breton, René Magritte, amentalisme, 1947 Abstract: The conflict waged in 1947, through letters and exhibitions, between the surrealist group of Bucharest and the Belgian surrealist painter, René Magritte on the one hand, and, on the other, Magritte and André Breton, the leading figure of the French surrealist group, is being considered here as typical of the multiplicity of tensions that traversed the international surrealist movement. In the aftermath of the second world war, this conflict bears witness, through the confrontation of divergent sensibilities and strong rhetoric, to one of the most nevralgic moments of European history. By reconstituting this episode from the position of the little-known Bucharest group, the article introduces it to the readers. Key words: Surrealism, Gherasim Luca, Paul Păun, Victor Brauner, World War II, André Breton, René Magritte, Amentalism, 1947
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".