MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162665614 · doi:10.59236/emro.v24i8a7844

Fanny

2022· article· W7162665614 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda Dempf

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Media Reviews Online · 2022
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusic History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeRacismPeriod (music)Character (mathematics)Performance artLiving room

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed by Film MovementProduced by Bobbi Jo Hart and Robbie HartDirected by Bobbi Jo Hart2021, Streaming, 96 mins Bobbi Jo Hart’s documentary tells the story of the forgotten all-female band Fanny, arguing that the band was a driving force in the late 1960s and early 70s, paving the way for women in rock. The narrative traces the band’s roots in Sacramento, where it began performing as The Svelts, eventually taking on the name Fanny. In 1969, the band moved to Los Angeles, living in what became known as the Fanny Hill House. They were part of the L.A. rock scene, performing in clubs, touring, and hosting regular jam sessions at the house with the likes of Bonnie Raitt, Bob Dylan, and members of Little Feat. Fanny cut several albums with major labels and toured in the U.S. and abroad through the mid-70s, often opening for other hard rock bands like Humble Pie and Deep Purple. Fifty years after the bands’ founding, Fanny reunites to record a new album, “Fanny Walked the Earth” (2018), and the documentary interviews take place during this period, providing rich present-day reflections. These first-hand accounts from Fanny members are a powerful telling of the challenges experienced by women in rock, not only battling sexism, but racism and homophobia as well, as three of the band members were Filipina, and two were lesbians. The film effectively teases out the tension between the rebellion, outsider status, and artistic freedom that is characteristic of rock, and the control imposed by the record labels, agents, producers, and other star-maker machinery of popular music. One member acknowledged the “silent liberation” that music afforded, yet the band was up against a system that basically didn’t know what to do with them. Promoters encouraged Fanny to play up their image of having boyfriends, to wear skimpier outfits on stage, and managers retained a control on their finances and housing situation, creating tension, and leaving some band members artistically stifled. In addition to the interviews with band members, we hear from a star-studded group of fellow rockers and producers, and several younger women talk about the impact that discovering Fanny has had on their musical lives. Fanny’s 1960s and 70s footage from concerts and recording sessions is compelling, and the soundtrack is terrific. The documentary would fill curricular needs in women’s and gender studies, music, and cultural studies. Awards:Rogers Audience Choice Award, Hot Docs; Best Canadian Feature Film, InsideOut Toronto; Best Documentary, Outshine LGBTQ+ Film Festival; Best Music Documentary, Edmonton NW Film Festival; Audience Choice Award, San Diego Filipino Film Festival

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8480.532

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational Media Reviews OnlineSame topicMusic History and CultureFrench-language works237,207