MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403334772 · doi:10.3138/jrpc-2022-0028

Morrissey and Daoism: Easy Wandering, <i>Wuwei</i>, and the Aesthetics of Awkwardness

2024· article· en· W4403334772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thorsten Botz–Bornstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the author draws attention to “Daoist” themes in Morrissey’s art and personality. The link between Morrissey and Daoism can be established via Oscar Wilde, whose relationship with Zhuangzi’s philosophy has been much commented upon. Morrissey’s worldview and art have been shaped by Wilde, whose Complete Works Morrissey received from his librarian mother at the age of eight. The self-estranging irony, the incorrect behavior, as well as the conviction that aesthetics is more important than ethics, are emblematic of Zhuangzi, Wilde, and Morrissey. Linking themes of East Asian philosophies to Morrissey’s art is historically justified. There is an affinity between Daoism/ Buddhism and the subcultural context from which Morrissey emerges. Morrissey becomes the Oscar Wilde of post-punk. Morrissey rejects all taints of rock’n’roll machismo and plays up to social awkwardness of the misfits and the outsider. The article also deals with the following themes : strength arising from weakness, uselessness, aimless wandering, language skepticism, identity, authenticity, handicap, camp, and finally, the aesthetics of awkwardness. Awkwardness transcends mere clumsiness (which is no aesthetic quality at all) and becomes potentially attractive. Morrissey’s wuwei strategy of non-pretentious acting creates an aesthetics of awkwardness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.024
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207