Writing the body, writing the land : Barbour, Brandt, Webb, and Halfe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
'Writing the Body, Writing the Land: Barbour, Brandt, Webb, and Halfe' examines the poetics and backgrounds of four western Canadian poets whom I find vastly influential in my own writing. Organized into four focal chapters, in addition to a full manuscript of poetry, this thesis sets out to examine, within each chapter, one of the four chosen poets' work and its specific influence upon my own writing, as evidenced by connections made to the poems from the creative manuscript 'Seldom Seen Road'. Starting with Douglas Barbour's work with the breath and with sound poetry, the thesis progresses through Di Brandt's ecopoetics and Phyllis Webb's obsession with voicing the silenced feminine through the landscape, and ends at Louise Bernice Halfe's focus upon writing across cultural boundaries. I have undertaken both explanatory and exploratory research in this thesis in the forging of connections between the focal poets' work and my own, and in researching poets whose work is not necessarily critically well known. For instance, although a portion of this thesis examines the work of poets who have already had some critical exposure, such as Brandt and Webb, other areas, such as the chapters on Barbour and Halfe, potentially represent some of the first major lengthy pieces of critical writing about these poets. The creative collection 'Seldom Seen Road' is my way of examining the influences of the four focal poets upon my own writing. I have carefully considered each poet's influence upon particular areas of my work (for instance, Webb's and Barbour's influence through the form of the anti ghazal) both prior to and during the writing process. This has resulted in a poetry manuscript that was formed in active consultation with the texts of the four focal writers and reveals my engagement with each of their distinct poetics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".