Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores acts of non-material familial Jewish legacy, beginning with the Jewish ethical will of Yiddish comic writer Solomon Rabinowitz in 1916, and closing with a collaboration of wordless music with legend in the contemporary moment in Canada. This research provides a modality of Jewish familial legacy that highlights individual voice to illuminate how individual memory moves as an active force, a dynamic Aleida Assman describes in her essay, Canon and Archive as active remembering (Collective Memory Reader 334-337). This individual voice functions as a strategic disruption that has an impact on what is remembered, what is transmitted, as well as what is excluded and forgotten. \nIn positioning the concept of transmission as its primary organizing principle, the dissertation examines four modes of transmission : the democratized machinery of oral performance embedded within Rabinowitzs ethical will, the impact of an accidental transmission upon Canadian novelist Alison Pick, a counter transmission by Canadian teacher Henia Reinhartz linked with a postwar counter memorial movement and, in conclusion, an embodied transmission through wordless melody. Looking at individual strategic acts of non-material legacy as components of Jewish cultural memory, the project redefines what memorialization and modes of transmission can explore, upend and suggest. In its totality, this dissertation argues against a passive model of storage by examining these strategic creators and the reception of their works. In so doing, the project illuminates the field of individual acts of cultural memory. Reception reveals the intriguing and unpredictable afterlives of the transmissions. In moving voices from the periphery into the centre, this project explores the creative possibilities of historical remembrance as a form of moral witnessing, and reveals a spectrum of acts of resistance against erasure.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".