MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089426646 · doi:10.1558/rsth.v29i2.171

“Hate Me Now”

2011· article· en· W2089426646 on OpenAlexaff
Siphiwe Ignatius Dube

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusic History and Culture
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAestheticsRealmMusicalMessiahSensibilitySociologyAbsurdityPoliticsMetaphorLiteratureArtPhilosophyLawTheologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyses rapper NAS’ video entitled “Hate Me Now” as an instance of his broader self-perception/self-construction/self-affirmation/self-proclamation as the Messiah of hip-hop and a rap-prophet making proclamations on American socio-political and religious values. In particular, the article locates and evaluates the significance of the video within the broader context of the artist’s ambiguous negotiation of the relationship between religion(s) and hip-hop–explicitly rap music–that extends beyond the usual blues connection. The article makes the claim that through rap music and other aspects of hip-hop culture, certain hip-hop artists see themselves as performing the role that they believe religious leaders and politicians seem to have failed at fulfilling. In this sense, NAS’ soteriological self-portraiture in the video analysed in this essay, and his musical career in general, is more than simply metaphoric, but enters into the realm of the metonymic, thus opening up space for a reconfiguration of not only hip-hop as another source of a religious sensibility, but also of “religion” as another commodity in the diverse marketplace of worldviews that give meaning to our everyday reality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicMusic History and CultureFrench-language works237,207