Beyond the Two Solitudes: Differences in Fluidity in Franco-Canadian BD and Anglo-Canadian Comics Through the Influence of Manga
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I study the influence of manga on the two main Canadian comics worlds. I show how, for several reasons that I will explain, the Anglo-Canadian comics world has been quite receptive to manga influence, while the French-Canadian one has been much less welcoming. This different degree of influence can be seen in one aspect of the formal structure of comics: the various panel layouts on the page, sometimes called the grid. Mainstream French-Québec BD (BDQ) tends to use a more regular grid than mainstream Anglo-Canadian comics. The latter adopts a more fluid form of the grid, which is also typical of manga style. Using Brenna Clarke Gray’s parallel between territorial border and comics gutter (Gray 2016), I argue how these differences can be seen in some concrete examples from both Canadian linguistic communities. I conclude with the Tamaki cousins’ graphic novels to emphasize how fluidity is a reflection of, and on the Anglo-Canadian comics world, and maybe beyond, which could be seen as a critique of the notion of rigidity in various fields (identity, sexuality, border), as well as a calling for textual, sexual and national fluidities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".