MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W339337050

RECLAIMING DIFFERENCE: Caribbean Women Rewrite Postcolonialism

2006· article· en· W339337050 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katherine McKittrick

Bibliographic record

VenueResources for feminist research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCaribbean history, culture, and politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostcolonialism (international relations)SubalternColonialismDisappointmentMartiniqueSociologyNeocolonialismGender studiesNarrativeEmpireHistoryThe ImaginaryCriticismAestheticsLiteraturePoliticsArtPolitical sciencePsychoanalysisLawPsychologyEthnology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RECLAIMING DIFFERENCE: Caribbean Women Rewrite Postcolonialism Carine M. Mardorossian Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press; 2005. In Reclaiming Difference: Caribbean Women Rewrite Postcolonialism, Carine M. Mardorossian asks us to consider the ways in which critical authors - Jean Rhys, Maryse Conde, Edwidge Danticat, and Julia Alvarez - provide a understanding of subaltern writing and criticism. This renewed perspective, Mardorossian explains, is not one that merely unsilences black/Caribbean voices or asserts an oppositional narrative that counters Euro-Western colonial philosophies. Rather, the theoretical underpinnings of Reclaiming Difference disclose the ways in which the critical writings and thoughts of these writers envision the future by questioning the terms in which the colonial past has been cast rather than by reacting against it (p. 8). It follows, then, that the writings of these particular Caribbean women do not easily follow anti-colonial and postcolonial trends of insides/outsides, the empire writing back, novels of delegitimation and disappointment. Instead, Mardorossian suggests that these creative works operate across and beyond these trends. These writers bring into focus our lingering attachment to questions of race; but more importantly, they also pay attention to how these attachments are limited. In refusing to cast race as the only organizing category through which Caribbean texts are produced and written - and can be read - Mardorossian analyses the work of these Caribbean women as racial crossings, literatures that destabilize our investment in both the seeability of corporeal schemas and the modern nation. In addition to creatively opening up new analytical questions, Mardorossian argues that these writers provide us with innovative approaches to reading precisely because their texts unsettle the classificatory bodily logics that continue to organize our world. Reading practices are connected to, then, the question of rewriting - which is what interests Mardorossian. She unravels how race, identity, nation, home, exile, gender and class are approached by Caribbean women writers vis-a-vis complex canonical narratives and the question of nation affiliation: the Brontes loom large offering the author a place to analyze the deep and meaningful re-configuration of race provided by the writings of Conde and Rhys; the raciology of Withering Heights is illuminated as Mardorossian allows us read this classic text anew, through the inseparable racial-economic contours embodied by central characters Heathcliff and Catherine Earnshaw; the seeming axiomatic connections between race and nation are thrown into disarray through a discussion of creatively writing Caribbean-ness beyond the Caribbean, not simply through the eyes of a migrant exile, but through a sense of a changing space that is continually encountering, and incorporating, outernational and local subjectivities and concerns. …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.017
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResources for feminist researchSame topicCaribbean history, culture, and politicsFrench-language works237,207