'Reflections From Exile': Exploring Prisoner Writings at the Louisiana State Penitentiary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research investigating life inside U.S. prisons is on the decline at the precise time when it is arguably most desperately needed. And absent from much of the work that has been done is a consideration of how incarcerated men and women actually cope with, conceive of, and experience their imprisonment. Undertaking the case study of the Louisiana State Penitentiary (Angola), I analyze over two decades worth of prisoners' writings contained in The Angolite prison newsmagazine in order to further our understanding of the daily lived experiences of incarcerated individuals during the era of mass imprisonment. First, I examine how the correctional instability that characterized the last several decades of the twentieth century played out on-the-ground at Angola, as well as how penological changes shaped the conditions of confinement and impacted prisoners' lives. Next, I explore in-depth one factor with the potential to influence a prisoner's life behind bars: masculinities. Specifically, I investigate how prisoners navigate the hypermasculine prison code in addition to how they conceptualize manhood. And in the third paper I dig deeper into Angola's plantation past. That is, I analyze how administrators narrate the history of the prison to tourists and outsiders as well as if and how the collective memories of slavery and the Jim Crow era inform prisoners' ideas about their incarceration today. Overall, this project actively strives to highlight prisoners' humanity and complexity, document the nuances of prisoners' carceral experiences, and demonstrate the value of incorporating prisoners' knowledges into academic debates.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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 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".