Reconstructing Colonialism: Graphic Layout and Design, and the Construction of Ideology*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le lien entre l'image et l'idéologie est un des thèmes les plus étudiés en sociologie visuelle. Il existe néanmoins une sérieuse lacune dans notre compréhension des procédés visuels auxquels on a recours pour créer une idéologie. Cet article, au moyen d'une analyse du rôle de la juxtaposition et de l'enchaînement visuels dans la publication gouvernementale britannique The Colonies in Pictures, atteste un mécanisme jusqu'ici ignoré dans la formation de l'idéologie. Je soutiens que la publication reconstruit une idéologie coloniale britannique en faisant passer de l'ethnicitéà la culture le marqueur utilisé pour distinguer le britannique du non‐britannique. Une telle reconstruction avait été rendue nécessaire en raison du contexte historique qui a suivi la Deuxième Guerre mondiale et a permis aux Britanniques de conserver une main‐mise sur l'économie des colonies tout en leur accordant une autonomie politique. The connection between image and ideology is one of the most analysed themes in visual sociology. Despite this, there exists a serious omission in our understanding of the visual processes used to create ideology. This article, through the analysis of the role of visual juxtaposition and sequencing in the British government publication The Colonies in Pictures, documents a previously ignored mechanism for ideology formation. I argue that the publication reconstructs British colonial ideology by shifting the marker used to distinguish between British and non‐British from ethnicity to culture. Such a reconstruction was necessitated by the historical circumstances following World War II and enabled the British to retain economic control over the colonies while granting political autonomy.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".