The Struggle for the Streets of Berlin: Politics, Consumption, and Urban Space, 1914–1945
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As its subtitle suggests, Molly Loberg’s study of Berlin engages multiple spheres and discourses. It grants each a measure of autonomy but also integrates them into an intriguing narrative. The streets are primarily those of the commercial and administrative heart of the city where Berliners and visitors circulated in large numbers for consumption, parades, protest and entertainment. They are at once literal and metonyms for the convergence of politics and commerce in the metropolis, experienced by contemporaries and re-imagined in the narrative. The ‘struggle’ ranges across everything from poster campaigns and competition between shopkeepers and hawkers to demonstrations and anti-Semitic violence. Treatment encompasses popular protests, retail trade, street-selling, advertising, traffic control, prostitution, crime, policing and municipal improvement. To enumerate these gives some idea of the richness of the palette on offer here. These diverse themes are approached in broad chronological sequence, giving somewhat greater weight to the Weimar years, while including flashbacks to the prewar period for contextualization. They are tied together within an overarching argument about the interconnectedness of interwar mass politics and mass consumption and by the premise that the street represented the premier mass medium of the age, confronting and being contested by an enormously diverse, participatory audience. The street functions as the subject as well as object of conflicting agendas and interests. It plays an active role in the political process just as it does in the creation and satisfaction of consumer desires. Loberg argues that the latter predated mass politics and converged with it. ‘When it came to competition for the streets, Berliners made no distinction between commerce and politics’ (p. 13).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".