Bibliographic record
Abstract
A brief historical overview considers a number of factors that were not propitious for the development of a home-grown comics culture in Quebec (notwithstanding the popularity of a few noteworthy artists) including the impossibility of competing with cheaper American production, and the ambient conservatism that dominated much of the twentieth century. Beaulieu goes on to describe the shock and excitement of his discovery in the mid-1990s of an alternative comics scene (more active in Montreal than in Quebec City), and his own involvement in it from the beginning of the twenty-first century as an artist, publisher and teacher. He offers a firsthand account of the realities of negotiating the pressures of alternative comics publishing within the two structures that he set up: Mécanique Générale and the smaller and (still) more radical Colosse. There are pleasures: the ethos of collective work, the opportunity to support up-and-coming young authors and to ensure the survival of work by an illustrious predecessor, invitations to take part in productive exchanges on a local, national and international level, and the sheer obsessive pursuit of perfectionism. But there are also frustrations: the never-ending grind of getting manuscripts ready for the printer, wearying battles with publishers' reps, the constant need to manage the expectations of authors and the skewing of the market by competitors prepared to outsource printing to Asia. The author explains his decision finally to withdraw from his publishing commitments and to focus on his own work. His conclusion, about the future of comic production in Quebec, is, however, optimistic and devoid of cynicism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.153 | 0.055 |
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".