MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041171571 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.22.2.5

The Haunted <i>Terroir</i> : Memory, Language, Landscape and Identity in Francis Leclerc's <i>Mémoires affectives</i>

2009· article· en· W2041171571 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Hodgins

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNationalismIntertextualityCultural memoryIdentity (music)HistorySociologyLiteratureAestheticsAnthropologyArtLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article looks at the manner in which a recent Québécois film – Francis Leclerc's Mémoires affectives (2004) – uses avant-garde formal and narratives devices to unsettle the memory- terroir -language-masculinity equation upon which traditional Québécois nationalist identity narratives rest. In so doing, it renders the Québécois terroir 'unhomely' by revealing it to be at once haunted by traumatic and fragmented memories of colonial and gendered violence and simultaneously 'home' to the languages, memories and histories of the myriad 'Others' whose presence is conveniently forgotten and/or repressed by the linear and univocal nationalist narrative. In its experimentation with multiple temporalities and fragmented narrations, its promiscuous use of intertextuality and allusion and its constant indexing of the 'constructedness' of memory and identity, Mémoires affectives can be read as an attempt to provide a blueprint and a vocabulary for more plural, open and self-reflexive projects of identity construction in a postmodernised Quebec.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.024
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207