On Strangers and Ambivalence: Reconsidering the Ethical Boundaries of Asylum in Michael Helm's Cities of Refuge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Michael Helm’s recent novel Cities of Refuge (2010) offers a gallery of physically displaced people and of spiritual exiles who, albeit presenting different characteristics, are all subsumed within the category of the stranger. By foregrounding the ethical responsibility toward the stranger in our midst, the novel engages with questions of current concern, such as the impact of global-scale displacements and conflicts on the Canadian nation-state. Consequently, while delving on the ambivalence of the stranger, this essay tangentially addresses the following questions: how does the state manage its physical and imaginary borders? How does the presence of undocumented subjects impinge on Canada’s national self-image in the age of official multiculturalism and extolled pluralism? How is the average Canadian urbanite affected in his/her everyday life by the presence of these underground, non-status subjectivities? In which ways are the violences of history and of the state brought to bear upon the bodies and destinies of failed refugees in Canada, as well as upon Canadian citizens themselves? Given the philosophical extent of these concerns, my reading of the novel has been inspired by the discussions of Jacques Derrida and of Zigmunt Bauman around the ambiguities attached to the figure of the stranger. Frank Kermode’s Sense of an Ending has proved equally illuminating in my attempt to grasp the novel’s focus on the production of narratives as tools for providing order and meaning out of the ambivalent and apocalyptic experience characteristic of our globalized world.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.081 | 0.121 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| 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".