MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312784693 · doi:10.1177/1750698011415247

‘Monument to the international community, from the grateful citizens of Sarajevo’: Dark humour as counter-memory in post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina

2011· article· en· W2312784693 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Sheftel

Bibliographic record

VenueMemory Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsSaint Paul University
FundersSaint Paul UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsBosnianNarrativeDissentHistoryCultural memorySociologyMedia studiesGender studiesLiteratureLawPolitical scienceAnthropologyArtPoliticsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The challenges of remembering and memorializing the violence of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s tumultuous 20th century have captivated numerous scholars’ imaginations, because Bosnia is a remarkable example of both the utility and abuse of wartime memory. However, the elephant in the room during these discussions is the role of dark humour in narratives of Bosnia’s recent past. This article argues that dark humour is an especially subversive form of counter-memory, that allows Bosnians to express dissent from dominant narratives of the Bosnian War that they perceive as unproductive or divisive. Examples are drawn from oral histories, film and monuments to demonstrate how humour speaks to three major themes of Bosnian remembering: the idea of Bosnians as powerless victims; the seemingly arbitrary nature of the war and its aftermath; and the failures of the international community before, during and after the war. Bosnian dark humour critiques not only the above themes, but simultaneously the social structures in place for discussing the past.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.022
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemory StudiesSame topicHumor Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207