Gender, genesis and generation: Colette and Germaine Beaumont’s journalism at <i>Le Matin</i> , 1910–1924
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article compares the journalism and literary output of Colette and a less famous French writer, Germaine Beaumont, before, during and after they worked at a major daily newspaper, Le Matin, 1910–24, considering them as members of two different generations of women entering the male-dominated and masculine-defined occupation of journalist. The article addresses the effects of their gender on their employment as literary and women’s page columnists, respectively, but not as reporters with by-lines appearing on the front page, i.e. the prestige positions and location in daily newspapers. A second line of enquiry examines how their choices of female protagonists and modern feminine perspective in their journalistic and literary works contributed to the late recognition of Colette’s genius and the (contemporary) near ignorance of Beaumont’s oeuvre. A third argument shows how Colette, a successful member of the second generation, actively assisted Beaumont, a member of the third generation, in getting a position at Le Matin, and then acted as a model of good work and writing practices for the younger author. Equally importantly, Beaumont acknowledged and applauded Colette for mentoring her. The article is part of a larger investigation into the second and third generation of newspaper women and cites evidence of similar experiences in the reception of other women journalists’ writing as well as the role of cross-generational encouragement among women journalists.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".