Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the works of Canadian impressionist painter Helen McNicoll (1879–1915), analysing them as creative inventions that mediate the irreducible gap between cultural symbolization and experience. McNicoll was a painter of women and girls, and the essay centres on the difference that gender makes in her canvases. Femininity is not the works' only operative axis of distinction, however. McNicoll's nationality and, most significantly, her deafness, conjoined with gender as constitutive and structurally overlapping elements of her pictorial production. The artist's applications of paint to canvas are visible renderings of an ambiguous relation to symbolization wrought by this conjunction. In this context, McNicoll's choice of pictorial style is especially apposite, and the paper explores the way in which impressionism's ideal of direct correspondence between experience and representation resonated forcibly with the ideologies of femininity and language available to a deaf woman painter at the beginning of the twentieth century. Kristina Huneault is Associate Professor and Graduate Programme Director in the Department of Art History at Concordia University in Montreal. She is the author of Difficult Subjects: Working Women and Visual Culture, Britain 1880–1914 (Ashgate, 2002), and is currently working on a book that examines visual inscriptions of gender in art by nineteenth‐century Canadian women.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".