Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Harlem Renaissance is a decade known for its fluidity and non-conformity that allowed for a thriving underground culture where Black queer Americans could organize and interact, as long as they remained hidden. While the queer community and the Black community flourished independently, the Black queer community was left behind in the wake of great progress for Black Americans, erased from the historical narrative despite its major contributions to Black and queer advancement. This presentation will examine how the Harlem Renaissance (1920s-1930s) fostered an underground network that allowed for the expression of the natural fluidity of sexuality and gender, unavailable to the heteronormative White Western society that existed above ground. Secondly, despite the Black queer community being credited for Black and queer progress, it was simultaneously victimized by a Black society so desperate for progress that it conformed to the colonial way, developing internalized racism and constructing an elite, heteronormative hierarchy through discursive distancing. This presentation will argue that the Black queer American experience of the Harlem Renaissance was erased from the historical narrative by White, Black, queer and straight masculinities, and that the repression of this community further subordinated both the Black and Queer communities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".