Review of <i>A Book on the Making of Lonesome Dove</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Book on the Making of Lonesome Dove entrenches the epic deeply among Western history lovers. John Spong’s forty interviews with author Larry McMurtry and many of the cast and crew take you behind the scenes as you reexperience the life of American cowboys and westward expansion. Stunning film photography by Jeff Wilson, joined by exciting on-set stills by executive producer and screenwriter Bill Wittliff, bring readers a feast of visualization. A part of the Southwestern and Mexican Photograph Series of the Wittliff Collections in San Marcos, Texas, the book adds yet another chapter to the pioneer legend. Despite often being considered a Texas story, much of Lonesome Dove’s action takes place across the Great Plains. Dust of the Kansas Plains swirls around the cattle herd, while scenes of early Ogallala, Nebraska, evidence early urban development. Buffalo roamed the continent, yet the story of their history and near extinction holds prominence in the Great Plains. The tenuous lives of the prairie pioneers, buffalo hunters, and farmers are clearly defined, as are the dangers of crossing rivers such as the Canadian, Platte, and Yellowstone. Angelica Huston’s Clara amazingly depicts the women who survived the isolated loneliness of the Great Plains frontier. Native Americans get the too-often bad press, but were decidedly a force to be contended with as they maintained claim to their rightful homelands.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.017 |
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".