Bibliographic record
Abstract
If a citizen can be created via music, as Jann Pasler has argued, then how might one “compose” a female citizen—a citoyenne—when the very concept of female citizenship was politically illegitimate?1 This article attempts to answer this question by examining the opera Sapho, the first full-length French opera on the celebrated ancient Greek poetess. It was written by the female author Constance-Marie de Salm (1767–1845), and set to music by the male composer Jean-Paul-Gilles Martini.2 Their collaboration was unusual. In general, composers and librettists in late eighteenth-century France were paid the same amount and had the same rights over their operas. Co-creators of different sexes, indicated by the titles Citoyenne Pipelet and Citoyen Martini on the libretto and the printed score, complicated this supposedly “equal” partnership.3 Unlike the gender-neutral English word “citizen,” the French, citoyenne is gendered female and may strike musicologists nowadays as particular. This gender asymmetry operating on the grammatical level skewed the reception of the opera. In a review published in 1795, the author, following the title page of the libretto, calls the librettist de Salm “Citoyenne Pipelet,” but names the composer simply as Martini. The specification of Pipelet’s gender with “citoyenne,” coupled with the omission of “citoyen,” emphasizes Pipelet’s gender, implying that it was natural for a male to compose an opera but unusual for a woman to write its libretto. This article aims to investigate this gender asymmetry. The opera Sapho, I propose, discloses a tension between gender and creative partnership in the history of opera and citizenship.4
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".