MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3181503404 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14251

Art and the Inaka: Yamamoto Kanae and New Conceptions of Modernity in Rural Japan

2020· dissertation· en· W3181503404 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret Bryan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernityScholarshipIdeologyNegotiationThe artsContext (archaeology)PoliticsGender studiesSociologyPolitical scienceAestheticsSocial scienceArtHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yamamoto Kanae (山本 鼎, 1882-1946) is credited as the founder of sōsaku hanga (The Creative Prints Movement) in Japan as well as the developer of nōmin bijutsu (The Farmers' Art Movement) and jidō jiyūga no shōrei (The Children's Free Drawing Movement), all of which have retained lasting social and cultural legacies up to the present day.However, while some scholarship exists on his work with these individual projects, there is a paucity of research connecting these seemingly disparate, yet deeply thematically entangled, movements.This thesis divides Yamamoto's career into three periods-his time in Paris, Moscow, and Ueda-looking at how his experience in Moscow particularly informed his complex ideological approach to art.The discussion of his engagement with Russian folk arts and thinkers acts as a stepping stone to construct a broader understanding of moments of transcultural exchange between Japan and Russia at the turn of the twentieth century.By examining Yamamoto's life and work within the context of his contemporaries and concurrent political and cultural events, this thesis seeks not only to provide a comprehensive English-language monograph of the artist's activities, but also to use this analysis as a case study to discuss broader issues concerning local-translocal relationships in rural art and negotiating urban-rural binary frameworks that persist in contemporary arts discourse.The examination of these kinds of bifurcated structures through the lens of Yamamoto Kanae explores means of dismantling them as the field continues to work towards more nuanced ways of framing global art history.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.022
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.302
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicCultural Industries and Urban Development→French-language works237,207→