MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W326115054 · doi:10.3138/cjfs.21.2.115

Nostalgia for the Liberal Hour: Talkin’ ‘Bout the Horizons of Norman Jewison’s Generation

2012· article· fr· W326115054 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Daniel McNeil

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Film Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtEthnologyPhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tout au long de sa carrière de cinéaste, Norman Jewison a combattu des stéréotypes qui dépeignent les libéraux de race blanche comme des bien pensants hypo crites et de mauvaise foi. Il s'est également approprié—tout en la contestant—la figure de la victimisation face à des capitalistes révolutionnaires et des antiracistes radicaux. Cet article attire l’attention sur les lieux communs qui existent entre la pensée du cinéaste canadien et celles de Robin Winks et Michael Banton, deux universitaires reconnus aux États-Unis et en Grande Bretagne qui se sont aussi opposés aux pratiques néolibérales qui semblent faire une trop grande distinction entre l’éthique et la politique tout comme les études politiques provenant des intellectuels radicaux. L’article conclut en contrepoint de l’humanisme libéral de Jewison, Winks et Banton en se tournant vers le nouvel humanisme de Paul Gilroy et de George Elliott Clarke, deux intellectuels post-coloniaux qui se sont opposés à l’étroitesse disciplinaire et aux études nationales trop insulaires. Je défends l’idée que le travail explorateur, provocateur et évocateur de Gilroy et Clarke peut aider aux études canadiennes, dans leur tentative de s’arrimer aux débats qui ont cours aux États-Unis et en Grande Bretagne et aussi aux travaux transatlantiques qui se prétendent trop souvent globaux.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0030.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Film StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207