Rebirth | Revolt | Resurrect – A Conversation about Uhuru Phalafala’s "Mine Mine Mine" (Creative Intervention)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Helene Strauss (HS): Thanks again for allowing me into the intricate spiritualmaterial work of "unburying" (2023, p. 55) that you do in Mine Mine Mine.The sacred alchemy by which you've turned the dust of South Africa's mines into this miracle of memory, rhythm, and sound, signals histories-in-waiting, an arrival in print of truths long ready to be told.The volume invites longoverdue scrutiny of mining as a site of racial, gendered, and environmental violence at scales both intimate and planetary, and as such, speaks powerfully to each of the three terms at the center of this Special Issue's collaborative inquiry -namely Reckoning, Repairing, Reworlding.As an offering of return to dignity and vitality, a refusal of the death and "ambiguous loss" (2023, p. 5) delivered to your grandparents by the train and the mineshaft, Mine Mine Mine is at once a call to arms, a love letter, and a roadmap to a better future.It crafts a moving vision of unburying as "undrowning," the word that Alexis Pauline Gumbs (2020) uses for "breathing in unbreathable circumstances . . . in the chokehold of racial gendered ableist capitalism" (p.4).Mining as drowning, writing as unburying.A chronicle of expropriation and exploitation:of the Atlantic and Indian, casualties of the middle passage residing in the womb-tomb of the ocean, unable to breathe from the hold of the ship to holding cells, to mine hostels, the final grave of mice and men of underground people, moles, and mules never to see the sun again
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".