Writing a Politics of Perception: Memory, Holography, and Women Writers in\n Canada, Dawn Thompson; Women's Movement: Escape as Transgression in North\n American Feminist Fiction, Heidi Slettedahl Macpherson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is where the deep work of minimising women's contribution to the field is been carefully reproduced through association with bathrooms and kitchen, role-playing (women as interior designers) and the use of nudity and sensuality common to advertisement strategies in general.The review articles tend to focus on accepted building categories such as housing and interior design for women architects.What makes this chapter so important is the contrast it provides with the analysis of work actually done by many Canadian women architects.Eva Vecsei, for example, was a leading designer for Place Bonaventure in the mid 1960s and La Cite in the 1970s, both huge multipurpose projects in downtown Montreal.These are very large commissions, a far cry from the gist of articles provided by the RAIC journal.If we compare this book to existing ones on women architects (such as those by Hayden, Favro, Berkeley, or Attfield) certain aspects stand out.First, it is a collaborative project between an architectural historian and a sociologist.Second, it is a very complete survey of all 1,500 women who were registered at one point in time in Canada -and this will remain as an important contribution to the field.Lastly, it rigorously avoids singling out certain women and turning them into heroes.We could say that it is a fundamentally democratic look at the issue of gender in the profession.In the end, Quebec women architects emerge as distinct in a number of ways: the unusually high number of them who practise in the province, and the fact that they mothered a relatively large number of children as they kept their practices going.One is left wondering why is that so.There is no doubt that this book has opened many important questions concerning both architectural practice and the particularity of the Canadian experience -and that is a great contribution to us all.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.044 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".