MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132855682 · doi:10.3126/sjah.v2i0.35014

The Politics of ‘Bare Life’ in Sharon Bala’s The Boat People: A Biopolitical Perspective

2020· article· en· W3132855682 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pradip Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueSCHOLARS Journal of Arts & Humanities · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicContemporary Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopowerHuman rightsPoliticsHegemonyGender studiesRefugeeSociologyInjusticePower (physics)TamilCitizenshipPolitical scienceLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through the biopolitical study, this paper digs out the problems of five hundred survivors who enmeshed in the war torn Sri Lanka and Canadian sovereign power as projected in Sharon Bala’s The Boat People that dramatizes the problems of the immigrants. A large number of Tamil people escape from Sri Lanka to Canada because they were under extortion and duress in their homeland. Unlike their expectation to get a safe haven in Canada, they undergo Ariadne’s thread like unending trial for refugee status. Neither they enjoy rights at home nor abroad, which the novel dramatizes and subscribes Foucauldian biopolitics, which investigates into the effect of politics in human life. Largely in biopolitics, politics imbricates into life. The asylum seekers from Sri Lanka in Canada fall victim of power technology at home and abroad. They are subjugated to endure the hegemony of the regime that reduces them into ‘homo sacer’ whom injustice can be done with impunity and their life into bare life, life without political rights. Like a muselmann figure during the holocaust, they undergo the trial and are kept in between belonging and non-belonging, which is inclusive exclusion. They strand like the persona non grata whose significance as human is outnumbered.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSCHOLARS Journal of Arts & HumanitiesSame topicContemporary Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207