MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2958275911 · doi:10.1017/9781787442573.012

Satie, <i>Relâche</i> and the Critics: Controversies and Legacy

2018· book-chapter· en· W2958275911 on OpenAlexaff
Jacinthe Harbec

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and TechnologyUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoralityArtAestheticsPhilosophyTheologySociologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Now what do you say about Relâche itself? It is perpetual motion, life, the minute when we all try to be happy. It is light, wealth, luxury. It is love far from the conventions of modesty – without morality for the stupid or artistic affectation for the snobs. Relâche is as much alcohol and opium as sports, strength, and health. It is baccarat or mathematics. Relâche is the optimism of happy people. In it, you will see a very beautiful woman, a very beautiful man, many beautiful men, and dazzling lights, all advancing in as fast and pleasant a motion as a 300 horse power car could give us on the best road lined with trees inclined by the illusions that speed gives. Relâche is black and white, night and day, day and night. Relâche , I hope, will go on in life like a beautiful woman who dares to show the most beautiful legs in the finest silk stockings, walking arm in arm with the most attractive athlete! This is the kind of advertising text that Francis Picabia published before the première of Relâche , an ‘instantaneous’ ballet in two acts ( Ballet instantanéiste en deux actes ) with an intermission containing a film ( Entr'acte cinématographique ), and a finale entitled ‘The Tail of the Dog’ (‘La Queue du chien’). In light of these most preposterous and provocative lines, it was expected that this production by Picabia, Erik Satie and René Clair would be outrageous and align itself with Dadaist aesthetics for which derision had become a matter of principle. ‘Wear dark glasses and bring something with which to plug your ears’, announced the advertisement that appeared in the periodical 391 a month before the première in a special issue devoted to Picabia's ‘Journal de l'instantanéisme’. On the title page of the latter Picabia defined instantaneism with recourse to ideological slogans designed to grab the attention of the reader: Instantaneism: does not want yesterday. Instantaneism: does not want tomorrow. […] Instantaneism: only believes in today. Instantaneism: wants freedom for all. Instantaneism: only believes in life. Instantaneism: only believes in perpetual motion. The notion of ‘today’, understood as ‘here and now’, is fundamental to defining instantaneism. For Picabia, ‘the instantaneist does not seek out his roots in the past or in the unconscious’, he only believes in the present instant, composed of a series of unexpected images that are simultaneously present.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.033
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
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
GenreOther

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 topicHistorical and Literary Studies→French-language works237,207→