CONFORMISM VERSUS NON-CONFORMISM AS A QUEST FOR THE GENUINE IN ART IN GEORGE BOWERING’S “THE HAYFIELD”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conformism versus non-conformism as a quest for the genuine in art in George Bowering’s “The Hayfield”. Gordon Featherall, the art historian protagonist of Canadian writer George Bowering’s short story, “The Hayfield” aspires to become a genuine painter through his knowledge of art. Contemplating literary and pictorial aesthetics of the twentieth century and having studied the oeuvre of famous literary figures and painters, he makes an attempt at painting his subject, the hayfield. Will he succeed in his endeavors to achieve something genuine? Building on a detailed analysis of the protagonist’s painting-, and literature-related remarks, the paper aims at exploring the connection between conformism/ non-conformism in art and genuine artwork. REZUMAT. Conformism versus non-conformism, mijloc de căutare a autenticului în artă, în “The Hayfield” de George Bowering. Gordon Featherall, istoricul de artă protagonistul al povestirii “The Hayfield” de George Bowering, năzuiește să devină un pictor autentic, prin cunoștințele sale din domeniul artei. Contemplând estetica literară și picturală a secolului al XX-lea și studiind, în prealabil, opera unor autori și pictori celebri, acesta încearcă să picteze subiectul ales, o fâneață. Va reuși el în demersul de a realiza ceva autentic? Bazându-se pe o analiză detaliată a picturii protagonistului, dar și pe aspecte ce țin de analiză literară, lucrarea își propune să exploreze conexiunea dintre conformism și non-conformism în arta autentică. Cuvinte cheie: conformism, non-conformism, autenticitate în artă, pictură și literature, critică literară.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".