MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386387367 · doi:10.1353/sdn.2023.a905808

Climate Change, Interrupted: Representation and the Remaking of Time by Barbara Leckie (review)

2023· article· en· W4386387367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tobias Wilson-Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in the novel · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeHistoryPraxisSociologyPoliticsMedia studiesEnvironmental ethicsLawPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Climate Change, Interrupted: Representation and the Remaking of Time by Barbara Leckie Tobias Wilson-Bates LECKIE, BARBARA. Climate Change, Interrupted: Representation and the Remaking of Time. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2022. 274 pp. $90.00 hardcover; $30.00 paperback; $16.50 e-book (Kindle). Barbara Leckie's new monograph Climate Change, Interrupted (2022) arrives in a moment of crisis, both for the humanities and for the world ecosystem that supports the current form of human life more globally. Indeed, this fact is the obsessive, boiling center of Climate Change, Interrupted, which poses the questions of "what have we provoked?", [End Page 345] "what is wrong with us?", "are we knowingly causing a mass extinction?", and "are we evil?" (150–51). The "we" Leckie returns to throughout the text is often an avatar derived from Leckie's own experience of attending Ottawa's "Climate Emergency Camp" where local environmental groups occupied space in temperatures as extreme as -30°C as a form of protest. While sharing tea and supplies with the activists, Leckie was invited to come in and join them in their tent. Her decision to remain outside of the tent becomes one of the overarching metaphors for missing out on full participation in activism. The book, then, constitutes a reflection on whether Climate Change, Interrupted can theorize and even perform a conceptual shift from token engagement with ecological criticism to a form of composition as praxis. Can we, Leckie might say, write ourselves inside the tent? Questions such as these form the spine of what Leckie identifies as a discursive moment defined by a debilitating panic that appears to short-circuit the very activity it is meant to motivate. Leckie responds to this conceptual quagmire by invoking Benjamin's "Theses on the Philosophy of History" (1940) and its infamous "Angelus Novus" who sees history as "one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage" (9). She describes Benjamin's caricature as positing a moment of brief exteriority to the temporal activity of history, and, as such, a possible location for non-panicked collective thought and action. This challenge, for Leckie, introduces "many alternatives to teleological and linear form: montage, quotation, layering, constellation, superimposition, and interruption" (9). She gathers these modes into the central temporal proposition of the book, "post-time," an expansive term that encompasses Leckie's attempts to think about "multiple and discordant temporalities together…a word for thinking about what I cannot do in language: that is, thinking outside of or after time" (32). While the discussion of post-time emerges from considering postal temporality in George Eliot's Adam Bede (1859), Climate Change, Interrupted largely departs from a traditional academic monograph. Leckie chooses to formally and stylistically challenge the disciplinary form of her own work in breaking the fourth wall and normative monograph frameworks in a series of experiments. "My purpose," she writes, "is to reframe the frame itself" (84). I must pause briefly to discuss how this creates difficulty for the academic reviewer (me, in this case). Arriving at the scene of Leckie's new monograph is not so much meeting a text to review as it is encountering a reviewer already busily at work. She revises, regrets, rewinds, and reworks herself alongside an array of fields, concepts, and memories. Reviews tend to taxonomize the usable features of a book, classifying it in ways that will impact its readership. But this book is not readily available for such a classification because it rejects many of the tendencies and features that generally accommodate such a review. Instead Leckie seems determined to develop an interior/exterior authorial voice that self-reviews in the act of writing at the levels of individual, profession, and global humanity. The book—while gripped with the imperative of being useful—does not make itself so in the traditional academic sense. To the degree that it possesses a thesis to center its gravity, it is more of a roving thematic swirling around Leckie's concept of post-time and interruption. The various sections not only do not overtly participate in recognizable critical subfields, but they also materially differ in their staging on the page. Part One pivots into an experiential...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in the novelSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207