MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159887206 · doi:10.7202/011285ar

Ethnographie, littérature et art dans l’oeuvre d’Anne Eisner (Putnam)

2005· article· fr· W2159887206 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christie McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent article examine la transformation de l’ethnologie et de l’interprétation dans les travaux de l’anthropologue Colin Turnbull et de la peintre Anne Eisner (Putnam). Cette dernière, qui a vécu à la lisière de la forêt d’Ituri, dans l’ancien Congo belge (République démocratique du Congo ou RDC) durant les années 1940 et 1950, puis à nouveau en 1957-58, a transcrit deux cents légendes des Pygmées Mbuti ; l’utilisation (et, comme nous le verrons ici, la transformation) qu’a faite Colin Turnbull de certaines de ces transcriptions laisse entrevoir une vision du monde faite d’oppositions : Pygmées Mbuti-Villageois Bira, forêt-village, bonne mère-mauvaise mère. L’oeuvre d’Anne Eisner dévoile davantage des ponts et des intersections plutôt qu’elle ne polarise l’inclusion et l’exclusion soulignées par Turnbull. Les toiles d’Eisner laissent transparaître le regard nuancé que l’artiste pose sur la société d’Epulu, qui s’explique par son statut de mère parmi d’autres, de femme, d’Occidentale et de peintre. Il y va du dialogue entre l’étranger et le familier qui génère des interprétations différentes et par là brouille souvent la distinction nette entre les données observées et les transformations auxquelles donnent lieu l’écriture ou l’art.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207