MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918445530 · doi:10.14746/snp.2018.18.24

Echoes of the Holocaust in Leonard Cohen’s art

2019· article· en· W2918445530 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karolina Adamskich

Bibliographic record

VenueScripta Neophilologica Posnaniensia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Political and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe HolocaustPostmodernismAmbivalencePoetryJudaismContext (archaeology)LiteratureArtAestheticsPhilosophyArt historyPsychoanalysisHistoryPsychologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leonard Cohen is mostly known as a singer-songwriter. Although his poems and novels are not as widely recognized as his music, it has been frequently argued that The Favourite Game (1963) and Beautiful Losers (1966) can be viewed as the most innovative and experimental novels to be published in Canada. They are also among the first representatives of Canadian postmodernism in literature. The main purpose of this article was to explore echoes of the Holocaust in Cohen’s novels, as well as in his book of poetry Flowers for Hitler (1964). Despite the fact that the links and allusions to Judaism made by him have been often stressed by the critics, what is demonstrated here is the fact that for Cohen, his Jewish heritage was not only a source of inspiration but also doubt and anger. This paper, apart from presenting the artist’s cultural and spiritual background, aims at demonstrating ethical ambivalences in Leonard Cohen’s art and examining the reasons behind the ambivalence, as well as discussing his works in the context of postmodern ethical theory.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.041
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScripta Neophilologica PosnaniensiaSame topicAmerican Political and Social DynamicsFrench-language works237,207