Bonsaver, Guido. America in Italian Culture: The Rise of a New Model of Modernity, 1861–1943.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guido Bonsaver's new book, America in Italian Culture, focuses on the process of Americanization of Italian culture in the years between Italy's Unification and the Fall of Fascism (1861Fascism ( -1943)).It explores the connections between "the transnational and the totalitarian" to examine the "cultural make-up of Italians" (viii).It does so by analyzing the cultural exchange between Italy and the USA and by focusing primarily on the Italian national and socio-political context.The book is divided into two parts, a logical choice of such a line of inquiry.This categorisation assists readers in understanding the intricate political and cultural evolution of Italian society and its mixed yet enduring fascination with "America."Part 1, "The Discovery of America, 1861-1919, " examines the reception in Italy of early American cultural imports, from the myth of America to the discovery of jazz music.Part 2, "American Culture in Fascist Italy, 1922Italy, -1943, " , " focuses on the fascination with American culture and products in the years of Fascist rule.Both parts are further divided into five chapters, each addressing one specific aspect of American culture in Italy.The organization of the material in a chronological order aids the reader in navigating a vast corpus that would otherwise appear overwhelming.Bonsaver adopts a multidisciplinary approach to observe the reception of American cultural and economic power in different cultural domains.More specifically, he uses a transnational framework enriched by Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital and Gramsci's idea of cultural hegemony.Semiotics and contact linguistics, as well as reception theory, provide further strength to the analysis of the six cultural fields examined in the book: periodicals, literature, film, music, radio, and comics.Together with complementary topics, like the knowledge and dissemination of the English language, the spreading of other American products and models, such as architecture, technology, and philosophy, this makes for an all-rounded analysis that has the merit of filling a gap in the field of the history of the relationship between Italy and the USA.At the same time, Bonsaver's book offers a comprehensive overview of academic works on the importance of American culture in modern Italy,
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".