The Repeating Body: Slavery’s Visual Resonance in the Contemporary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In The Repeating Body, Kimberly Juanita Brown insists that there is “no way to see the indexical force of the horrendous event of transnational slavery unless the way of seeing, the sight and the sound of it, is rearticulated and black women are at the center of the frame” (17). Telling the story of slavery and its afterlife, Brown argues, requires a “totality of vision” that’s attuned to black women’s corporeal vulnerability; to the embodied residues of exposure, institutionalized rape, and stolen breast milk that, to use one of Brown’s repeated verbs, “elongate slavery’s imprint” (3, 59). The Repeating Body offers a nuanced analysis grounded in detailed readings of embodiment in black diasporic and especially black feminist artistic works. And the organization of the book – a chapter-by-chapter accumulation of ways of seeing, the mingling of literary and visual works, and the recurrence of key artists – is beautifully suited to Brown’s aim of creating a kind of “camera lucida, allowing multiple vantage points through which to layer slavery’s recurring and repeating visions” (17).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".