MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281011474 · doi:10.3138/jcs.49.1.73

“Poet and Audience Actually Exist”: The Contact Poetry Reading Series and the Rise of Literary Readings in Canada

2015· article· en· W2281011474 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Cameron Anstee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryReading (process)ScholarshipLiteraturePerspective (graphical)American poetryHistorySociologyArtVisual artsPhilosophyLinguisticsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay documents and assesses the history of the Contact Poetry Reading Series (Toronto, 1957-62), arguing that the Contact readings mark the emergence of a vital form of modern literary expression in Canada. The essay has two primary goals. The first is to contextualize the Contact Poetry Reading Series as a fundamental component of Raymond Souster’s editorial work in order to enrich dominant critical perspective of Souster’s accomplishments as an editor and publisher. The Contact readings express the same drive on Souster’s part to “make contact” (between generations, between international communities, between poet and reader) that is identifiable in his work with Contact and Contact Press, only in this case under material conditions unique to the public performance of poetry. The second goal is to situate the Contact Poetry Reading Series within current book history and performance studies scholarship. In doing so, this essay positions the literary reading as an essential but understudied component of processes of publication, distribution, and reception of poetry in Canada.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207