MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738715208 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.29.2.4076

Champion of the Oppressed: Redescribing the Jewishness of Superman as Populist Authenticity Politics

2017· article· en· W2738715208 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher B. Zeichmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupermanLeft-wing politicsComicsPoliticsPopulismHEROSociologyPolitical radicalismIdeologyJudaismGender studiesIdentity politicsIdentity (music)Jewish identityMedia studiesReligious studiesLiteratureLawPolitical scienceAestheticsHistoryArt historyTheologyPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentators largely agree that the character Superman is rooted in his creators' Judaism. The present article supplements such research by historicizing Superman's Jewishness vis-à-vis the populist politics of the left from which he emerged, namely the social movement known as the Popular Front (1934–39)—a leftist political coalition marked by significant Jewish involvement. Examining the first year of Superman comic books (Action Comics #1–12, June 1938–May 1939), this article will suggest that the creators of Superman may have deployed the Kryptonian hero to delineate the “proper” relationship between ethnic and religious Jewish identity in the context of the Popular Front. It will be suggested that the authenticity politics in these Superman stories subordinates ethnic identity to leftist populism under the aegis of a loosely Marxist conception of “history.”

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.044
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207