Transformation and continuity in Trinidadian carnival : The new face of Mas'
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trinidad and Tobago makes the bold claim of being home to the Caribbean’s original carnival. As such, it has provided a template that has disseminated throughout the islands of the region. Since the mid-20th century the exportation of carnival from Trinidad has extended far beyond the boundaries of the Caribbean, leading to the establishment of Toronto’s Caribana and the Notting Hill carnival in central London. While both of these festivals have clearly been influenced by the Trinidadian pattern, they have also departed significantly, developing into events that recognise their own locales and celebrate the identities of their participants. This thesis examines past and contemporary articulations of carnival and engages with the discourse of ‘anxiety’ that surrounds its carnivalesque forms of play. The analysis begins by tracing carnival’s history in Trinidad and the Caribbean, accounting for the syncretic society that plays host to the event. This is followed by three chapters that each focus on a single literary text. Mustapha Matura’s Play Mas’, Nalo Hopkinson’s Midnight Robber and Earl Lovelace’s The Dragon Can’t Dance are read alongside a range of calypso and soca lyrics. The discussion this analysis generates points not only to the ways in which such texts relate to Trinidadian carnival, but considers the effect that genre and medium have on the discourse that emerges at the intersections of these creative practices. Of particular interest is the way in which literary texts utilise carnival as a motif and tool for advancing or critiquing pervasive narratives in the communities that they describe and serve. In each text carnival is presented as a form of ideological ‘labour’. The final chapter scrutinises the theatre of carnival and concentrates on the variety of music, costuming and lyrical ingenuity that lend it such a unique character. The advent of soca music and bikini mas’ will come in for particular attention as practices that have been victims of their own successes. By dominating carnival’s land- and sound-scapes they have provoked a broader exploration of contradictory tensions that speak to carnival’s storied past. The unease inspired by new forms of popular revelry highlight the need for Trinidad’s festive communities to account for and preserve the history of an ever-evolving carnival.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".