MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302415025 · doi:10.3138/jeunesse.6.2.15

The Uncanny Return of Repressed History in Jonathan Hobin’s <i>In the Playroom</i>: Playing beyond the Pleasure Principle

2014· article· en· W4302415025 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lisa Farley

Bibliographic record

VenueJeunesse Young People Texts Cultures · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUncannyEmblemIdealizationPleasurePsychoanalysisArtRepetition (rhetorical device)Object (grammar)RomanceAestheticsLiteraturePsychologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the motif of repetition in relationship to the pervasive emblem of the child as future. Drawing from Sigmund Freud’s discussion of the uncanny and from D. W. Winnicott’s theory of playing, the paper proposes that newness rests not on the literal fact of the child but in the play of signification—the life of the signifier—opened up in the haunting encounter with old scenes. When childhood is understood as an uncanny effect, we may encounter the adult’s repressed and quaking insides, an encounter from which typically we flee in the idealization of the child as future. This paper takes as its object of analysis a recent series by Canadian photographer Jonathan Hobin called In the Playroom, which features children as “doubles” who re-enact scenes of historical violence and power plays of the adult world. Hobin’s doubles have uncanny effects that hold the potential for renewed meaning in a world that turns on the compulsion to repeat.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.049
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJeunesse Young People Texts CulturesSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207