The ‘Myth’ of Beaumont-Hamel: Counter-Monumentality and Newfoundland Identity in Edward Riche's <i>Dedication</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The First World War has had an indelible impact on Newfoundland, shaping not only its relationship with Britain and empire, but also its union with Canada in 1949. For some, the Battle of the Somme was a powerful display of Newfoundland's identity as a British dominion and its loyalty to the mother country. Many Newfoundlanders, however, lament the tragic economic and political consequences of Newfoundland's war service that many believe led to its loss of independence and its union with Canada decades later. Edward Riche's 2017 play Dedication explores the legacy of the First World War on Newfoundland identity and the province's continued positive association with Sir Douglas Haig through the dramatisation of a grieving female journalist interviewing Haig in St. John's in 1924, just before the unveiling of the national war memorial. The play grapples with themes of colonisation, patriotism, and duty as the playwright seeks to challenge the prevailing myth of identity grounded in glorious sacrifice. While the interview in the play raises questions about the war's legacy through its focus on the dedication of the WWI monument by Haig himself, Riche interrogates Newfoundland's established memory of the war, as well as the value of monuments as historical markers of memory and identity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".