Agents of Modernity in Late Imperial France and Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The three articles in this issue each problematize, if in different ways, common narratives about French trajectories after World War II. Directly or indirectly, they each call into question the expansive, linear mythology that Jean Fourastié coined as France's Thirty Glorious Years in his 1979 book.1 As part of a growing body of scholarship that questions Fourastié’s periodization, Drew Fedorka, Brooke Durham, and Amelia Lyons expose how his chronology papered over France's decline as an international power during the polarized Cold War, its role in brutal colonial wars, the coup that ended one republic and ushered in another, the long road to economic recovery that thirty-year statistical averages belied, and the social and economic stagnation that the younger generation felt even at the supposed crest of postwar growth.2 All three articles explore questions related to France's effort to rebuild the nation's reputation and influence, particularly through the construction of a new generation trained to look to the future without fixating on the past, or even the shadowy corners of the present. The articles in this special issue highlight that postwar challenges—consumer shortages, the housing crisis, the Fourth Republic's revolving cabinets, the violence on the ground in Algeria, the problems associated with implementing development schemes in newly independent Africa—could not be hidden from view and reminded those who lived through this period of traumas in their nation's past and present. The historians contributing to this issue demonstrate how France's interest in creating a new sense of the nation, innocent of the dark years and all their baggage, as well as its obsession with maintaining its influence on the world stage as its empire crumbled, weighed heavily on the next generation of leaders.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".