Black Canadas: Rethinking Canadian and Diasporic Cultural Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diana Brydon "I say this big world is the story, I don't have any other" (Inventory 84) Rosi Braidotti suggests that "The human has been subsumed in global relations of intimacy, complicity and proximity with forces of the inhuman and post-human kind: scientific, industrial and military complexes, global communication networks, processes of commodification and exchange on a global scale" (264).She argues further that it is the task of critical theory to track the "fluctuations" of this new disorder (264).In this paper I ask what tracking these fluctuations involves, for the poet Dionne Brand who sets herself this task in her long poem, Inventory, and for the critic who reads her work fully attentive to the historical legacies of humanism and their entanglements with the humanities and the humanitarian.1 The CFP for this special issue asks two related questions that I pursue here: "what good is the study of literature?" and "how does the turn to ethics position literary criticism in relation to politics?"It is not possible to answer these questions definitively.In this paper, I follow Brand's lead into registering the visceral force of the kinds of global intimacies enumerated by Braidotti in order to ask what these practices imply for the political projects of citizenship and community in contemporary times.I argue that to fully grasp the implications of how Brand's poetry engages and is engaged in these emerging global complicities, critics need to attend to the dynamics of the experiential dimensions of its affect as well as its explicit meaning. 2 "On Poetry," the last essay in Dionne Brand's Bread Out of Stone, concludes: "Poetry is here, just here.Something wrestling with how we live, something dangerous, something honest" (183).Such a view of poetry condenses the ethical and the affective in
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.079 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".