Towards the Politics of Difference: Mobility and Ethnic Identity in Richard Ford’s Bascombe Novels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobility holds profound ethnic, class, and cultural significance in the fiction of the contemporary American writer Richard Ford. Through an analysis of his representative works, including Independence Day, The Lay of the Land and Let Me Be Frank with You, it becomes evident that Ford portrays the “negative mobility” of African Americans under spatial isolation, the transnational mobility of a Chinese immigrant, and the upward social mobility of both groups. In doing so, Ford illuminates disparities in mobility rights, routes, and friction among different ethnic groups, while also revealing shifts in their social status, values, and sense of identity. Furthermore, Ford reflects upon the social reality wherein ethnic minority groups encounter othering and marginalization upon integration into mainstream American society. This exposure lays bare the widespread systemic racial discrimination and deficiencies within the American political and economic system. Additionally, Ford’s depiction of upward social mobility among ethnic minorities underscores the effectiveness of the politics of difference as a means to resist authority and construct ethnic identity. Focusing on the mobility of ethnic minorities deepens our understanding of the survival dilemma and identity crisis faced by them.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".