MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409477449 · doi:10.2979/3986.0

Goth's Dark Empire

2005· book· en· W4409477449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carole Siegel

Bibliographic record

VenueIndiana University Press eBooks · 2005
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireArtChemistryAncient historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Siegel (English and American studies, Washington State Univ., Vancouver) counters the dearth of research into goth and the hostility of post-Columbine representations with a sympathetic, compelling examination of goth subculture as premised on gender fluidity, with sadomasochistic practices as 'radical technologies of resistance.' This argument is strongly informed by French theorists Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, presupposing some familiarity with their arguments. To this end, goth is a revolutionary mode of becoming in the face of alienating culture. Methodologically, Siegel draws loosely from many online discussions with goths, but more so on portrayals of goth through music, novels, and cinema, including Boys Don't Cry and The Matrix. For example, Siegel examines Poppy Z. Brite's novels to foreground the male hero as a masochist challenging the gender binary by 'queering' masculinity. Siegel also challenges perceptions of goth racism with attention to Asian American youths involved in goth. This book is sometimes difficult to follow. Chapter one opens with gender and sexuality in goth-related music and closes with a critique of abstinence-only education. Linkages between such elements depend on careful readers; such readers will be rewarded with a provocative analysis of the challenge and resistance goth desire represents within 'America's culture of denial.' Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.020
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndiana University Press eBooksSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207