MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024785563 · doi:10.24043/isj.109

The back side of the postcard: Subversion of the island tourist gaze in the contemporary Mallorcan imaginary

2020· article· en· W3024785563 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mercè Picornell

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe ImaginarySubversionTourismGazeRhetoricTemporalityAgency (philosophy)Interpretation (philosophy)Space (punctuation)Perspective (graphical)CriticismSociologyDystopiaAestheticsComicsVisual artsArtHistoryLiteraturePsychologyPsychoanalysisEpistemologySocial sciencePhilosophyPolitical sciencePoliticsLawArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyses the manner in which certain artists and activists in Mallorca have recently generated a counter-image of the traditional postcard, which essentially symbolises the tourist gaze. Taking examples from diverse sources, such as artistic pieces, memes, protest posters and underground comics, I analyse the mechanisms used to subvert the conventional tourist perspective of the island space. More specifically, I identify two strategies associated with the limitation of the space and time portrayed in the postcard. The confines of the space are manifest in the display of the off-camera and the critical anchorage of the image, while the limits of temporality are presented in a dystopic revision of the island map. To support the findings of this study, I have drawn on the ideas, theories and methods of island studies, tourism studies, postcolonial criticism and the rhetoric of images. The conclusions of this article aim to provide an interpretation of the complex emergence of a resistant social agency capable of creating its own portrayals of the island.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.033
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207