Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen: La recuperación de la memoria histórica de la Guerra Civil y del franquismo plasmada a través del Noveno Arte con frecuencia refleja una interpretación androcéntrica del concepto de “postmemoria” (Hirsch), que se declina sobre todo a partir de una genealogía patrilineal. Centrando la atención en la recuperación de una perspectiva matrilineal en cuanto a la memorialización del conflicto bélico y la posguerra, el presente artículo propone analizar las que denomino «cajas negras» (Latour) de la postmemoria, es decir aquellos cuerpos casi inermes que dan fe de unas maternidades traumáticas como ocurre en la protagonista de El ala rota de Antonio Altarriba y Kim. A partir del análisis de las metáforas visuales empleadas en estas narrativas gráficas y en diálogo con las teorizaciones de Bruno Latour y de Jane Bennett en cuanto a la materialidad de los cuerpos y Adriana Cavarero por lo que se refiere a la escritura de las historias de vida, se analiza la centralidad del cuerpo en un tipo de reelaboración artística mediada por la interlocución. Abstract: In graphic narratives, the process of recovering the historical memory of the Civil War and of Francoism often reflects an androcentric interpretation of the concept of “postmemory” (Hirsch), that is, an interpretation shaped especially by a patrilineal genealogy. The current article instead shifts the critical focus to a matrilineal perspective by proposing ananalysis of what I call the «black boxes» (Latour) of postmemory, the almost inert bodies that bear the memory of traumatic motherhood, specifically the protagonist of El ala rota by Antonio Altarriba and Kim. Through an analysis of visual metaphors, and in dialogue with Bruno Latour's and Jane Bennett's theories of the materiality of bodies as well as Adriana Cavarero's theory of life writing, I examine the importance of the body in a kind of artistic elaboration mediated through interlocution.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".