MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123675718 · doi:10.33776/candb.v9i0.4880

The Vibrancy of Materiality and Otherwise-Than-Place in Susan Gillis’s Obelisk

2020· article· en· W3123675718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leonor María Martínez Serrano

Bibliographic record

VenueRepositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Huelva (Universidad de Huelva) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and Beyond
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with Obelisk (2017), a poetry collection by Canadian Susan Gillis (b. 1959) concerned with the impact of human action on Earth in a myriad of forms. Drawing on a wide spectrum of poets, thinkers and artists, including Du Fu, Czeslaw Milosz, Walter Benjamin, John Dixon Hunt, Don McKay, Xi Chuan and Edward Burtynsky, Obelisk looks like an essay in fragments where Gillis assembles the precious insights of her ancestors to shed light on homo sapiens’ intromission into physical space to make the Earth suit human needs. When put together, her heavily annotated and erudite poems read like a denunciation of the indelible mark humans are leaving on the face of the Earth to make it a habitable space, whilst destroying it in the process. However, there is room in Obelisk for a probing reflection on wilderness and place, for a celebration of the vitality of matter and the more-than-human world, for an environmentally-informed critique of the way human action is having a colossal impact on the planet in the age of the Anthropocene, and for a meditation on what poetry can do in the light of environmental degradation to encourage humanity to act and live responsibly on Earth. Thus, Obelisk warns readers against the destruction of the biosphere and celebrates the persistente of poetry as a mode of knowing and as a tool for fashioning an environmental ethics

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Huelva (Universidad de Huelva)Same topicEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and BeyondFrench-language works237,207