“Make way for magic!” Continuities and changes in the portrayal of the Refus Global manifesto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1948, the Automatist artist group published the Refus Global manifesto, demanding liberation from Québec’s post-war conservatism. This thesis employs a critical cultural studies approach to trace the continuities and changes from 1948 to 1970 in the Refus Global’s portrayal as a site of affirmation and contestation of power by communities of interest, interpretation, and practice. The Refus Global is cast in an alternative media framework, and discourse analysis of archival research with frame analysis depicts its initial institutional repression. Next, this thesis contrasts these institutions’ adoption of the Refus Global in the wake of the Quiet Revolution with alternative media’s continued use of the manifesto as a tactic of resistance. An interview with journalist Françoise de Repentigny recounts her ties to the Automatist group and her firsthand experience of the era as a woman. This thesis concludes that the Refus Global’s portrayal as both a site of affirmation and contestation of power has ensured its longevity and legendary status in Québec today.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".