MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130802985 · doi:10.1093/fs/knn125

Spaces of Belonging: Home, Culture and Identity in 20th-Century French Autobiography Spaces of Belonging: Home, Culture and Identity in 20th-Century French Autobiography. By E <scp>lizabeth</scp> H. J <scp>ones</scp> . Amsterdam, Rodopi, 2007. 316 pp. Pb €63.00.

2008· article· en· W2130802985 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire Boyle

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Critical Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostmodernismBiographyOriginalityIdentity (music)PostmodernitySpace (punctuation)Relation (database)AestheticsSociologyValue (mathematics)LiteratureHistoryArtPhilosophyAnthropologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elizabeth Jones's stimulating study of the intersections between place and identity, principally in the self-writings of Hervé Guibert, Serge Doubrovsky and Régine Robin, ranges over fertile ground as it interrogates the extent to which ‘life writing could be said to constitute a form of “postmodern cartography”’(p. 294). Postmodernity and questions of place are not uncharted territory in autobiography studies (notably being covered in Gunnthórunn Gudmundsdóttir's recent but here unreferenced monograph). Yet, this contribution, based on the author's doctoral thesis, has a distinct originality, deriving partly from the interdisciplinary ambition behind Jones's project: to provide a bridge between geographical and literary studies. Jones amply illustrates the value of analysing the writing of space and place in autobiographical texts; she, furthermore, aims to demonstrate that such texts are invaluable in ‘deepening our understanding of the experience of space itself’ (p. 294). Jones explores the wilfully subjective, postmodern relation to space that her chosen writers articulate: examples include labyrinthine space in Guibert and intercontinental migrations through space in Doubrovsky and Robin. Postmodern autobiographical writings constitute exercises in self-consciously selective ‘wayfinding’, rather than ostensibly objective, totalizing acts of ‘mapping’. For Jones, this approach to knowing and writing space in contemporary French autobiography indicates the impact on personal identity of a changed relation to space in an increasingly globalized and transnational era. The analyses of space are often the most satisfying aspects of Jones's work. There are rich, thought-provoking readings of Guibert's autofictional protagonists occupying and being dispossessed of specific spaces, and of Robin's representations of Montreal as a hybrid space. Jones's study also very persuasively establishes the usefulness of interrogating notions of home and belonging that emerge in autobiographical texts. This study has many merits, but there are also weaknesses. In particular, the ambitious and commendably interdisciplinary theoretical framework buckles at times; notions of ‘mapping’ and ‘space’ can slip from the carefully theorized to the metaphorical. Overall, the central argument is somewhat lacking in force, in part hampered by a tendency to repetition and excessive recapitulation, itself reflecting shortcomings in the distribution of material between chapters. There are also, disappointingly, conspicuous errors and inconsistencies in the copy. An important question is raised by Jones's assertion that her study deals with autofiction rather than autobiography: that of referentiality. Jones justifiably adopts Doubrovsky's definition of autofiction, but less restrictive conceptualizations exist. Autofiction is a broad church, and allows for the writing of invented space, or at very least the re-invention of real spaces in writing. This complicates Jones's argument that life-writings function as postmodern cartographies in ways which are not fully resolved. Jones appears to retain the notion that cartography involves the representation – however subjective – of an externally existing space (albeit not necessarily a pictorial representation), but autofiction exists precisely to refuse such clear-cut groundings in referentiality. Thus, while the volume makes an important contribution to French autobiographical studies, widening its purview, claims for the interdisciplinary usefulness of interpellating postmodern life-writings as what Jones must have been tempted to call autobiocartographies may not entirely convince.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrench StudiesSame topicFrench Literature and Critical TheoryFrench-language works237,207