Androgyny, masculinities and the re-gendered aesthetics of the new wave: Duran Duran and the second British Invasion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The early 1980s presented a reaction to the steadfast musical genres of disco and rock, along with responses to the ways that men were represented during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The genre that responded to the images of masculinity of the time was called ‘new wave’ music. This wave often made reference to bands outside the United Kingdom, in what is generally understood to be the second British Invasion. These new images of the masculine allowed young men to challenge gender norms, and the new male of the time became a visible signifier: a vision of maleness into a post-glam-rock pastiche of movement, contradictions and irony. By using the band Duran Duran as its subject of analysis, this article examines the ways by which the masculine re-signified itself, as well as ways that one can read alternative images of maleness away from the confines of a more mainstream heteronormativity. In doing so, it takes a close look at music history, images of masculinity, the new wave movement and Duran Duran, with the aim of articulating how the youth culture of the time and the second British Invasion provided necessary relief from the sometimes confining realities of maleness and masculinity found in more mainstream cultural production of the early 1980s.
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 | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".