Body in Transit, Body in Transition: Resignifying Colonial Wounds in Roch Carrier’s <i>La Guerre, Yes Sir!</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Québec’s status as a potentially colonial space that underwent a process akin to decolonization during the Révolution tranquille has generated much critical attention in recent years, as scholars consider how Québec’s liberatory struggles resonate with other narratives of decolonization around the globe. Roch Carrier’s first and most renowned novel, La Guerre, Yes Sir! (1968), deserves particular attention as a literary work that interrogates Québec’s colonial dynamics. While scholars have emphasized the images of the body in Carrier’s work, with particular consideration of La Guerre, Yes Sir!’s carnivalesque elements, no study thus far has focused on how shifting depictions of individual bodies over time and space allegorize transformations of an imagined national body. In this article, I argue that La Guerre, Yes Sir! dramatizes Québec’s struggle to regain possession of and define its national body, as represented by the villagers’ desire to recover physical and symbolic possession of the corpse of the fallen soldier, Corriveau. Specifically, I examine Carrier’s engagement with familiar tropes of contemporaneous anticolonial writing, such as the wounded or cannibalized body, demonstrating the community’s power to ultimately reinterpret them. This article concludes by considering how the novel’s final scenes critique the nationalism that seems a prerequisite for the villagers’ assertion of 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".