MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781687405 · doi:10.1093/melus/mlx084

Tourists in the Kitchen: Asian American Culinary Travelogues

2018· article· en· W2781687405 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas Tromly

Bibliographic record

VenueMELUS Multi-Ethnic Literature of the United States · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeFoodwaysMainstreamStereotype (UML)RomanceIgnoranceHistoryGender studiesAsian americansSociologyMedia studiesAestheticsAnthropologyPsychologyLiteratureEthnic groupArtSocial psychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Narratives of culinary tourism describe the experience of travel undertaken with the express purpose of retracing foodways, and cooking and eating in a cuisine’s place of origin. This article explores culinary travelogues by Jen Lin-Liu, Anne Mah, and Cheryl Lu-Lien Tan. In each narrative, Asian American women travel to Asia to learn about food and, by doing so, reconnect with familial and cultural pasts about which they feel ignorant. These texts address a mainstream American readership and construct a sense of race-neutral intimacy through avowals of ignorance about Asia and by offering aspirational narratives of professional resolve and domestic and romantic satisfaction. I argue that the texts’ authors are nevertheless anxious that their relationship with readers could be imperiled by the taint of otherness historically ascribed to Asian food and, by extension, to Asian bodies. The authors ensure that they fall on the near side of difference for their readers by disavowing aspects of Asian cuisine that their readers might find challenging, particularly dog meat. These culinary disavowals extend into the human register when the authors highlight the otherness of the people they encounter in Asia.Ironically, these texts of cultural self-discovery demonstrate the longevity of the stereotype of the Asian American as inauthentic US citizen.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMELUS Multi-Ethnic Literature of the United StatesSame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207