Bibliographic record
Abstract
Is, Freedom Ain't, Scott Saul presents a detailed reading of Charles Mingus's "Haitian Fight Song" and makes the case that interdisciplinary study of innovative musical practices that emerged from jazz in the post-World War II and Cold War years can have a wide impact in a number of discourses. The dual process of looking at specific musical texts and situating the artistic practices that they represent in a larger social and cultural milieu is the general aim of the book. As Saul states, "hard bop" is "music of cultural burial and cultural awakening" (2). Indeed, Freedom Is, Freedom Ain't is centrally focused on the historical formation of hard bop and the overlapping imperatives of larger social, cultural, and political struggles: I consider hard bop to be a musical facet of the freedom movement-an extension particularly of the idea of direct action into the realm of structurally improvised music. The hard bop group, with its loose, spontaneous interplay and its firm sense of a collective groove, modeled a dynamic community that was democratic in ways that took exception to the supposedly benign normalcy of 1950s America. (6) Saul's expansive study draws its name from Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, from a sermon delivered by a preacher that uses the rhetorical ideas of "black is" and "black ain't" to problematize assumptions about racial identity. Saul borrows this notion, arguing that "jazz of the 1950s and 1960s was marked by an Ellisonian recognition of both the strength of African-American culture and the futility of race-hardened thinking, and was energized by an Ellisonian desire to marry virtuosity and community involvement" (xiii-xiv).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".