The Windsor/Detroit Border Region: A Transnational Jazz Community (1940s & 1950s)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The 1950s have been called the “golden age of jazz in Detroit” on account of the role Detroit jazz musicians played in the development of the hard bop style. This sub-genre – a synthesis of R&B, gospel and blues elements with the traditional bop style – became very popular in the 1950s and quickly spread across America. Scholarship in recent years has examined Detroit’s contribution to the development of jazz, but its smaller Canadian counterpart, Windsor, has largely been ignored. The presence of an urban border facilitated a considerable amount of cultural exchange between the two cities, and cross-border advertising campaigns suggest that jazz clubs on either side of the border were attracting international audiences. This project examines the implications of the unique cultural dynamic in the Windsor-Detroit border region and tracks the development of a transnational jazz community in the 1940s and 1950s. Using GIS software, a map of relevant jazz performance venues (i.e. jazz bars, concert halls) was created to better visualize the concentration of the jazz community on both sides of the border. This study of important cultural hubs – a culmination of previous research, archival work, and interviews with local musicians – suggests that the Windsor jazz community developed as a product of the growing influences and pressures from the booming jazz scene in Detroit and grew dependent on American customers. Other issues of Americanization, cultural appropriation, and the cross-border economy are also discussed. Studying these unique relationships between transnational jazz communities generates interesting applications to multi-disciplinary work relating to understanding borders and their socio-economic impact. KEYWORDS: Borderlands, Jazz, Windsor-Detroit, Borders, GIS Software, Digital History, Musicology,
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".