MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390506990 · doi:10.4324/9780429286698-43

Anti-Epic as National Epic

2024· book-chapter· en· W4390506990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicólas Suárez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEPICHistoryArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike the United States, Argentina does not have a genre in literature and film comparable to the “Western” in the United States (or the “Northern” in Canada), which glorifies and romanticizes colonial expansion and the conquest of Indigenous lands and peoples. This chapter draws on José Hernández’s Martín Fierro , as a case study to explore the interlacing of epic and power in Argentine cultural history. Published in two parts in 1872 and 1879, the poem has sparked numerous debates on the uses and meanings of the epic, largely due to its own ambiguity: while the first part is an anti-epic critique of state violence against rural inhabitants known as gauchos, the second part, in the mode of national epic, shows the assimilation of gauchos into the liberal state. Both parts circulated among the working classes, but it was not until the turn of the century that conservative elites strategically turned a quarrelsome gaucho into a paradigmatic hero, and canonized the poem as a self-legitimatizing story of Argentine nationalism and modernity. Focusing on literary and cinematic adaptations of the poem, this chapter examines how and why Martín Fierro has been used for different ideological and political purposes up until today.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207