MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412032414 · doi:10.4324/9781003558095

The Politics of Sex, Race and Working-Class Slang in Late Second Empire French Caricature

2025· book· en· W4412032414 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireRace (biology)SlangPoliticsGender studiesClass (philosophy)HistoryPolitical scienceArtGenealogySociologyAncient historyLawPhilosophyLinguisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines caricatures as they appeared within popular Parisian magazines in mid-19th century France at the time of the 1867 World’s Fair. Chapters compare the comic mockery of several of the most important satirists of this time, including Amédée de Noé, or “Cham” (1818–1879) as he was more popularly known, and Honoré Daumier (1808–1879). A major theme within the analysis is how these caricaturists secretly used argot (street slang), as documented in two slang dictionaries by Parisian litterateur, Alfred Delvau (1825–1867), within their comic images to carry hidden encrypted messages in order to evade the censorship of the day. The book focuses primarily on caricatures of Chinese visitors who were part of the 1866 diplomatic visit to Paris and images of Chinese at the 1867 Exposition Universelle, showing how the satires which were published by Cham used argot to create highly sexualised images that were often racist in nature. In contrast, the volume proposes that Daumier used slang in his caricatures to challenge racism and to make secret reference to current political leaders and politics. The book will be of interest to scholars working in art history, visual culture, media studies, and communication studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207