MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7138958565 · doi:10.14288/canlit.vi262.198925

"Talking to" and Creating Coresistances with Diasporas in Lee Maracle’s Talking to the Diaspora

2023· article· en· W7138958565 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Campana

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPostcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiasporaIndigenousPoetryColonialismRelation (database)Resistance (ecology)Hybridity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article by Christine Campana engages three poems from Stó:lō writer Lee Maracle’s collection Talking to the Diaspora (2015) to query the term diaspora and to consider what different diasporas may gain from listening to Maracle’s “talk.” Analyzing Maracle’s representations of diasporas, in relation to Michi Saagiig Nishnaabeg writer Leanne Betasamosake Simpson’s concept of “constellations of coresistance,” discussed in As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom Through Radical Resistance (2017), reveals that Maracle not only speaks back to white settlers; she also encourages creative conversations with communities of colour. The poems “Talking to the Diaspora,” “On the 25th Anniversary of Martin Luther King’s Death,” and “Remembering Mahmoud 1976” demonstrate how Maracle invites Black and Palestinian peoples rendered diasporic by settler colonialism to join her in reimagining belonging on Turtle Island in a way that prioritizes care for Indigenous lands. Without negating differences between peoples, Maracle’s poems reorient potential coresistors across time and space, reminding them of moments of coresistance and the futurities they can create together.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.025
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicPostcolonial and Cultural Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207