MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888246253 · doi:10.1353/jeu.2018.0008

Refusing the Role, Embracing the Hole

2018· article· en· W2888246253 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joshua Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueJeunesse Young People Texts Cultures · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSouth Asian Cinema and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerMedia studiesLiteratureArtHistoryArt historySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Refusing the Role, Embracing the Hole Joshua Whitehead (bio) Allan, Jonathan A. Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus, U of Regina P, 2016. 249 pp. $34.95 hc. ISBN 9780889773844. Jonathan Allan's Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus is a timely addition to sexuality, gender, affect, queer, psychoanalysis, and cultural studies. Allan probes what the anus signifies through a variety of cultural texts and theoretical genealogies. I write this in the aftermath of the feuding derrières of Kim Kardashian and Nicki Minaj attempting to "break the Internet" and the barrage of "booty selfies" emerging from the likes of Justin Bieber, Orlando Bloom, and Nyle DiMarco. This rise in visibility of the ass has led to popular media companies such as Vogue and The New York Times publishing on "belfies" (a combination of "butt" and selfie" [Connor]), to the rise in cosmetic surgeries involving the butt (Meltzer), to the virality of what I would call anal horror in films such as the [End Page 169] Human Centipede trilogy, through to bell hooks leading a panel entitled "Whose Booty Is This?" And in the wake of RuPaul's Drag Race becoming mainstream, I cannot not hear All-Stars winner Alaska Thunderfuck telling me "anus thing is possible" while writing this review. It then comes at no surprise that we are baring witness to the hyperpopularization of all things anal in our current cultural productions. Allan grounds us in all things anal by reminding us that the anus was, and remains, a site of contestation and surrounds itself with affects that include shame, anxiety, fear, and paranoia. He argues that the anus works to orient sexualities, calling it "the very ground zero of gayness" (8). In his introduction, "No Wrong Doors: An Entryway" he asks if there are methods to "engage the anus but not fall victim to a hermeneutics of suspicion, a paranoid, anxious, or nervous reading practice, one that always insists on a certain orientation?" (9). Allan insists that in order to read from behind, we must procure a blend of theoretics to shift our optics from our phallocentric trainings to this very ground zero from which he asks us to peek. Producing a methodology for reading from the bottom, Allan aligns himself closely with the work of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, primarily her essay "Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading; or, You're So Paranoid, You Probably Think This Essay is About You." Reading from Behind seeks to reset the affective interpolations of the anus in its homophobic and effeminophobic understandings to produce a new kind of reading, one motivated by the reparative and its unknowing. This new methodology works within the boundaries (re: buttocks) of affects, both negative and positive, to "negotiate our relations to these affects, thinking through the complicated and complex ways in which affect informs idea … it is worthwhile to benefit from the tension" (14). In doing so, Allan affords us a rich and complex constellation of readings by highlighting those affects that make us uncomfortable in texts we hold dear, in order to further our understanding that "[t]he anus is remarkably rich with hermeneutic potential, and critical theory has done a disservice to its complexity by privileging the phallic referent" (70). In the first chapter, "Anal Theory, or Reading from Behind," Allan expands the scope of his methodology. "The anus," he writes, "is an opening to the text that has remained obscured by critical, intellectual, and affective anxieties that have not permitted readers the chance to engage with the other side of textuality" (6). Reading from Behind seeks to make the phallus peripheral in order to hone in on a median ground we all share. For the anus, Allan notes, "is inherently inclusive" (17) and vastly complex in its significations across race, orientation, sex, sexuality, ethnicity, and so on. Attempting to universalize the anus, to remove it from its ground zero and significations with gay men, we are asked "[w]hat does the ass, the rectum, the anus mean for masculinity, for the male body?" (28). To flesh out his provocation, Allan recruits Eric Anderson's conceptions of "homohysteria" to return us to a place of paranoia and...

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0140.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.017
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJeunesse Young People Texts CulturesSame topicSouth Asian Cinema and CultureFrench-language works237,207