Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walsh, Helen, ed. TOK 5: Writing New Toronto. Toronto: Zephyr Press, 2010. 207 pp. $19.95 sc. TOK 5: Writing New is fifth volume from Zephyr Press's Diaspora Dialogues series. The poems and short fiction in this collection centre on city: though most pieces emphasize character development, volume's focus on urban spaces directs readers to understand as made up of shared places that are experienced in different ways by different individuals and communities. The instruction to reader from editor, Helen Walsh, to a tourist in this known, and yet unknown, Toronto (7), highlights these differing perceptions of city. This imagined reader is already familiar with Toronto: pleasure of reading is seen to come from having known spaces recontextualized, as reader is invited to see through eyes of an imagined Other. The writer is thus positioned as a kind of guide, set up to reveal the truth of ethnic experience to a foreign audience. It is logical, then, that bulk of collection is realist fiction, accessible to a reader who needs to recognize a familiar space in order to understand it also as a new destination. The anthology includes work drawn from Diaspora Dialogues's mentorship program, which means that it contains work by established writers--Emma Donoghue, M. G. Vassanji, Nalo Hopkinson, and Shyam Selvadurai are examples--alongside work by emerging writers. Despite diversity of pieces, some common themes emerge. Many of writers engage with questions of power in both public and private spheres, and many contest ideas of inheritance or family through expressions of anxiety over parenting. The power of racist narratives to limit expressions of personal identity is a repeated motif, and this racism is seen to come from within particular communities as well as to imposed on them from outside. Taken together, these pieces present idea of multicultural city as being made up of a series of spaces that fragment individual identity. For example, in Gaughin's Chair Selvadurai's novella extract, protagonist experiences York University campus as a place of loneliness and anonymity, but it is also a place where he can be gay, pursuing a relationship with his classmate, lames. In contrast, his home is invaded by countless cousins, in front of whom he must remain closeted. Who he is allowed to be, and ways that he can express his identity, are dictated by where in city he is, and there does not seem to anywhere that he can fully himself. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".