Bodying Black Goddesses:The Duty of Representation Across Time and Cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Terry MP^Provost Conscious states exemplify a perpetual becoming, and the continuous prolongation of the past into the present -Philip Turetzky( 1998: 201) Certain contemporary portrayals of Black female deities which visually magnify the naked body conjure images of Black women from the Trans-Atlantic period.They connect the now to the colonial nineteenth and twentieth century during which a profusion of stereotypes of Blacks were disseminated in a variety of media.They also demonstrate how- derogatory images of Black women, which I shall call archetypal repre- sentations of alterity, have ambiguously transformed.These depictions have proven contentious when decyphered by different viewers.And that they are re-appropriated through generations and across cultures has only compounded today's problem of Black female stereotyping.Critical assessment of spectatorial response is significant to such rep- resentations once they are made public; for what is said against or in support of an image, especially if polemic, reveals the divergent political perspectives of gender and race as they relate to responsible art-making.Though having one's work diffused in media or in a particular venue is a privilege, the duty that comes with it is often overlooked-the duty of accountability, bell hooks urges that: Committed cultural critics-whether white or black, schol- ars or artists-can produce work that opposes structures of domination, that presents possibilities for a transformed future by willingly interrogating their own work on aes- thetic and political grounds.This interrogation itself
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 | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".