Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Considering two performance trajectories that have emerged from the varied dramaturgical history of the burlesque genre, epitomized by superstar Dita Von Teese and by the Toronto collective The Scandelles, this article demonstrates how neo-burlesque can usefully be divided into that which approaches burlesque as a noun and that which deploys it as a verb. Where Von Teese’s recreationist approach relies on, and reifies, notions of “the historical” to contain and contextualize her act as more tasteful than contemporary stripping, The Scandelles’ active burlesquing, which relies on irony, camp, and social criticism, calls the very essence of such monolithic narratives into question. Ironically, while the performance of The Scandelles has often been considered to be more akin to the “avant-garde” than to the neo-burlesque, I will show that it is, in fact, strikingly similar to the earliest, and least contemporarily familiar, years of North American burlesque.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".