Crossing the border(line) : Madonna's encounter with the Hispanic.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much has been written about Madonna's subversion, deconstruction and inversion of gender. With a few exceptions (hooks, 1992 and 1993; Nakayama and Peñaloza, 1993; Scott, 1993), critics have paid far less attention to her deconstruction of ethnic identities and very little has been written about her take on the Hispanic, which is perhaps the most influential and re-visited 'ethnic' style in her work. Almost every year since 1984 and up to 2003, Madonna has presented either a song, video, photo shoot or live performance displaying a Hispanic influence and she has recorded and performed in Spanish some of her hit singles. It has become common place both in academic and journalistic criticism on Madonna to describe her subcultural practices as 'an appropriation of style rather than a substantive politics' (Robertson, 1996). Yet most of this criticism, although apparently aware of the obvious implications of commerciality and longevity, seems to bypass the fact that Madonna herself, often hailed as the All-American girl, is in fact half Italian, half French-Canadian and the mother of a half-Hispanic girl. This chapter analyses four of Madonna's Hispanic-themed videos ('Borderline' 1984, 'La Isla Bonita' 1986, 'Take a Bow' 1994 and 'You'll See'/'Verás' 1995), the context of the film Evita (Parker, 1996) and some of Madonna's live performances in an attempt to explore her take on the Hispanic and to argue that, despite the plethora of stereotypical images used in these videos, Madonna's appropriations of Hispanic cultures and her own ethnic malleability could be read as a subversive reminder of the multi-racial and multi-cultural make up of the USA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".