SCULPTING SELF IN STRUGGLE: A PERFORMATIVE EXPLORATION OF SHAUNA SINGH BALDWIN'S WHAT THE BODY REMEMBERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shauna Singh Baldwin's Commonwealth Prize-winning book, What the Body Remembers (2000), explores the harsh realities of the history of partition. Baldwin makes the argument that gender places are socially constructed and assessed through performances, which results in a violation of oneness. By applying Butler’s theory of performativity, the paper examines the voices that have been muted because of a particular tradition. By examining the text through Butler's performativity framework, one can argue that performances fundamentally naturalize gender constructs. The psyche interferes with the internalisation process, which leads to melancholy. Therefore the paper tries to offer a new way of looking at the performance of gender places in a different perspective giving recognition to all the marginalised voices. Indo-Canadian author Shauna Singh Baldwin's first book, What the Body Remembers, explores the terrible realities of partition from the standpoint of the Sikh community. In 1999, the book won her the Commonwealth Pens Prize. It is notorious for describing the violence that followed Partition and for showing how the inflated effect of social-artistic spots on gender places led to violations of mortal freedom. Baldwin's depiction of tortured characters and their disturbed psyches captures the pressure and fermentation of the time. The power dynamics between politics and history, as well as how they're entwined with fornication, are outlined in the book. It also highlights how people — women in particular — come the goat for the insincerity of society.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".