The Odyssey of Internment Objects: Material Culture and Unarticulated Family Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the significance of eight wooden internment objects created in the Kananaskis prisoner of war camp (c. 1940–1943) and their placement after the owner/creator returned from the camp. Through an analysis of the placement of these objects in a suitcase in a dark basement corner for over forty years, the researcher can ascertain the presence of unexpressed trauma. This article reveals an inherent ambivalence felt by the creator/owner with respect to the significance of these objects. On one hand, the owner – Federico Ghislieri – wanted to forget this period of internment, as indicated by his silence, yet, surprisingly, he could not dispose of the material vestiges of his camp experience. Instead, he negotiated this by preserving them yet hiding them from view. This article reflects on this contradiction through an analysis of the work of four psychological and material cultural theorists whose work provides a framework for comprehension: Jung, Bachelard, Veyne, and Greenblatt. Together, these thinkers suggest that the placement, and displacement, of household objects demarcate an object’s perceived value, both personally and in our culture. Finally, one can gain insight into how object placement can also be a political statement, reflecting long-held anxieties about an immigrant’s safety in the new country he calls home.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".