MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960779694 · doi:10.1080/00111619.2019.1642844

Milan Kundera and the Radical Autonomy of Art

2019· article· en· W2960779694 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn Ownbey

Bibliographic record

VenueCritique Studies in Contemporary Fiction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersUniversitatea "Lucian Blaga" din Sibiu
KeywordsAestheticsPoliticsLaughterResistance (ecology)AutonomyLightnessLiteraturePoetrySociologyArtLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a cultural worker during the Cold War writing from behind, and about, the Iron Curtain, Czech writer Milan Kundera was subject to a double politicization of his vocation. On the one hand, within his own country, writers, artists, and intellectuals were forced to fit the socialist cultural program, or they were silenced. On the other, in the international arena cultural workers were being employed like never before in a war for cultural supremacy. Kundera resisted the politicization of culture, both within Czechoslovakia and internationally. He was critical of any regime or party that prioritized political ends over cultural ones, or that treated culture as a means rather than an end in itself. Kundera finds a literary mode of resistance to the overwhelming politicization of culture in the late Cold War years. In The Art of the Novel (1986), Kundera theorizes the novel form as radically apolitical. In The Book of Laughter and Forgetting and The Unbearable Lightness of Being, he puts this into practice: where politics – totalitarianism as one of its most acute iterations – requires unitary meanings, perfect façades, and generic, kitschy artistic forms, these texts, in true novelistic fashion, deal exclusively in complexity, unsightliness, and unformulaic genre mixing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueCritique Studies in Contemporary FictionSame topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207