MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606260301 · doi:10.1177/1097184x17703157

The Enemy Is The Centre: The Dilemma of Normative Masculinity in Darwyn Cooke’s <i>DC: The New Frontier</i>

2017· article· en· W2606260301 on OpenAlexaff
Neta Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueMen and Masculinities · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityComicsSociologyHEROGender studiesNarrativeAdventureIdeologyAestheticsPopular cultureNormativeWhite (mutation)RacismFrontierPoliticsLiteratureLawHistoryMedia studiesArtArt historyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article explores Darwyn Cooke’s 2004 comic DC: The New Frontier as a retrospective history for DC’s comic book characters of the 1950s; though this history takes into account certain problematic aspects of 1950s American culture—in particular the problem of racism and fear of the minoritized other—the comic does not in any way produce a critique of normative American masculinity. Making use of a critical framework that discusses white masculinity, nostalgia, and the “falling” man, and the conceptual work of scholars such as Sally Robinson, Michael Kimmel, Elizabeth Anker, and Hamilton Carroll, this article argues that Cooke’s comic recenters the white male adventurer/hero not only as a product of nostalgia but also as a post-9/11 response to the idea of the “falling man.” Cooke promotes a fraternal code as a way to resolve the problematics of diversity, constructs the flyboy as a falling man, whose rehabilitation as an everyday hero reflects the text’s idealization of retrograde masculinity, and transforms narratives about othering into celebrations of colonialism and American manifest destiny.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.034
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMen and MasculinitiesSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207