Heroic idleness: class matters in the history of surfing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the class background of surfers is considered by scholars in the field of surfing studies, there is a tendency to interpret ‘class’ in terms of income and consumption practices. This explains why surfers in the U.S. tend to be described as ‘middle class’. In this kind of conceptualization, class is typically used to signify privilege, the exclusion of others, and sometimes aggression. We use an alternative conceptualization of class that defines class as a social relation of production to reveal how class matters differently in the history of surfing, where certain working-class-subcultural forms influenced surfers in ways that signify joy and solidarity in surfing. We provide our alternative way of thinking about the significance of class in the history of surfing by discussing phenomena heretofore unexamined by surfing studies scholars: namely, certain cultural forms shared between California surfers in the 1930s and 40s and the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), a labor union that reached its zenith of influence within popular culture in the early decades of the twentieth century. The cultural resonance between these two groups persists today.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".