Fernand Dumont face à la culture populaire. Écriture de la nostalgie et usages socioculturels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose une lecture du double rapport qu'entretient Fernand Dumont avec la culture populaire et la culture savante. Son regard à la fois personnel et scientifique semble opposer la chaleur d'une relation personnelle et le regard froid du chercheur, la nostalgie passionnée d'un univers riche mais perdu à jamais et la froideur d'un discours scientifique penché sur les transformations inévitables, puisque universelles, du monde culturel moderne et de ses pratiques et modes de communication culturels. Dumont décrit ses rapports avec la culture populaire en termes apparemment contradictoires : il parle de « déchirement » et de « nostalgie », termes se référant à des rapports émotionnels; mais aussi de « mise à distance », ce qui implique un rapport refroidi, distancié, un regard analytique porté sur l'objet, sa culture d'origine, ses modes de communication et ses relations de sociabilité. Cette originalité réside dans une conceptualisation théorique qui allie, de manière heureuse, des perspectives sociologiques, anthropologiques et littéraires.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".