MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399762986 · doi:10.5206/notabene.v17i1.17194

Deconstructing Desire: Criticism of Western Romantic Narratives in Mitski's "Your Best American Girl" Music Video

2024· article· en· W4399762986 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicole Bussey

Bibliographic record

VenueNota bene · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusic History and Culture
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirlCriticismRomanceNarrativeArtGender studiesAestheticsLiteratureSociologyPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitski Miyawaki, a Japanese American indie-rock artist professionally known as Mitski, wrote her 2016 song, “Your Best American Girl,” from the perspective of a woman who is unable to have a relationship with her love interest due to their different racial and cultural backgrounds. The accompanying music video engages with the song’s social message while adding nuance and complexity to it. Many of the lyrics portray Mitski’s feelings of isolation as an Asian American woman, especially through their employment of Japanese cultural symbols, while the music video uses parody, camera angles, and Americana iconography to further illustrate Mitski’s experiences of isolation. This essay analyzes the subtle ways in which “Your Best American Girl” subverts Asian stereotypes and destabilizes white patriarchal structures that are perpetrated by popular media, particularly through white centrality in the indie-rock genre. Comparison of “Your Best American Girl” to Lana Del Rey’s “Born to Die” music video reveals how “Your Best American Girl” uses parody techniques to criticize this white centrality. Further, its references to PJ Harvey allows Mitski to occupy a similar position of musical authenticity and command respect. Through lyrical, musical, and visual storytelling, “Your Best American Girl” chronicles Mitski’s journey towards self-acceptance, while critiquing the pervasive whiteness in romantic narratives.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNota beneSame topicMusic History and CultureFrench-language works237,207