Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article I draw on Stuart Hall’s extensive writing on blackness generally, touch on the few instances of him directly addressing Africa and continental African blackness and on what Gayatri Spivak rightly sees as the missed articulation of Africa(ns) and the postcolonial cultural studies project in Hall’s work in order to undertake, à la Hall’s essay on Gramsci’s relevance for the study of race and ethnicity, a brief exercise on Hall’s relevance for the study of continental African blackness. The premise of my arguments is that Hall’s insistence on the importance of both difference and complexity should give us pause about the neat dualism of hybrid, evolving diasporic blackness and originary fixed continental blackness on the one hand and the assumptions of a spatio-temporally seamless homogeneous blackness from the continent to the far reaches of the diaspora on the other. Africa in general, and African blackness in particular, I argue, are in fact rather complex and this ought to be taken up more seriously and rigorously in conceptualizations of blackness and the field of cultural studies. Continued failure to do so, I conclude, has potentially serious consequences for the politics of representation and beyond.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".