On the distinction between creative and non-creative labour and on making comics in Guy Delisle’s graphic memoirs. From “travelogues” to “ <i>laborlogs</i> ”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guy Delisle’s comics have often been categorised among the subgenres of graphic journalism, travelogues, or travel autobiographies. Nonetheless, apart from the obvious detailed depictions of his travel impressions – an amply elaborated topic– there are some important, yet overlooked, recurring themes such as the aporia of creative labour, and the consequences of the changing nature and organisation of work from the beginning of the 1980s to the late 2010s on cultural industries and comics profession. Delisle’s memoirs delineate different types of organisational structures, interpersonal relations, and working conditions from the time he was employed as a salaried labourer and animator, along with the setting in which he had to perform his job as a self-employed, freelance artist. His visual narrations constitute a canvas of anecdotes and events, revolving around his working environment and professional context, not only during his sojourn in various countries but also in his hometown, Quebec, Canada. The present article suggests that Delisle’s ‘travelogues’ can be better understood as ‘laborlogs’. That is a term coined here from the synthesis of the word labour, toil, and log, a record book, a list, employed in order to lay emphasis on the importance of work and labour in the artist’s illustrations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".