Cybernetic Totemism in Giménez Caballero's <i>Hércules jugando a los dados</i> (1928)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this essay I consider Giménez Caballero's use of totemism in his collection of avant-garde essays, Hércules jugando a los dados, to be indicative of a desire for radical social transformation. Specifically, I argue that the author's elaboration of the concept as a renewed 'primitive' phenomenon based in technology not only points to early forms of cybernetics in the modern subject's 'battle' with the elements, but also is a key part of a larger social project. I contend that Giménez Caballero sees the reemergence of totemism as a way to reconcile the lower classes and the elite within a fascistic, vertical power structure, in which the hybrid mythical figure of Hercules has already led the way. As an important hinge work between avant-garde aesthetics and political engagement, I conclude that Hércules jugando a los dados offers important insights into the genesis of early fascist ideology in Spain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".