Hydrocentric Reading of Rivers: Waterways in Wade Davis’ Magdalena: River of Dreams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this article is to analyse Wade Davis’ outlook on the Magdalena River through the lens of Mielle Chandler and Astrida Neimanis’ (2013) inclusive understanding of gestationality. In his 2021 book Magdalena: River of Dreams. A Story of Colombia, the Canadian cultural anthropologist and ethnobotanist Wade Davis describes Colombia’s complex past and present, showing how the river shaped its people socially and culturally. Davis wants to make his readers aware of water as the fundamental, intertwining and non-human planetary agent within all areas of life, and wants them to reimagine their relation to the river. In his epic story of Colombia that braids together journalism, history, travelogue and memoir, Davis describes how Colombians are inextricably formed by their relationship with the Magdalena River, how they flow together and shape each other. This article demonstrates how his treatment of the Magdalena River renders it an active agent of social change by discussing relations between human and extra-human life and by describing the Magdalena’s gestational aspect.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".