Bibliographic record
Abstract
Los Angeles is central to Charles Bukowski’s (1920-1994) life and work. This paper examines the evolution of the representation of the city in his writings. It does so by situating the author in the broader context of the literary representation of Los Angeles in order to illustrate his particular perspective on the city and its many sites: that of a marginalized insider writing at street-level. It then proposes to reconstitute the dual trajectory of the author and his works in relation to the city. Interpreting Bukowski’s urban imaginary proves challenging because places are poorly fleshed out through description. Yet when approached as a whole, his writings do possess a coherent spatiality. Acutely myopic at first, the representation of the city gradually becomes more complex sociologically and geographically. Incomplete and patchy, the image of the city and its contrasted social worlds progressively acquires texture and depth. The paper finally argues the geographical imaginary Bukowski developed through his experience in the city’s underbelly informed his interpretation of L.A.’s social reality as a whole, provided him with the language and themes to express it, and supplied his very own vantage point to make sense of it all.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".