MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W314716529

Immersed in the Single Channel: Experimental Media from Theater to Gallery

2012· article· en· W314716529 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura U. Marks

Notice bibliographique

RevueMillennium film journal · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueCinema and Media Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArtObject (grammar)Visual artsNothingReading (process)Art historyAestheticsComputer sciencePhilosophy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In Steve Reinke's Anal Masturbation and Object Loss (Video) (2002), we encounter the artist preparing a book for the library in the art school he plans to start. A shot of his hands busy with a glue stick pairs with a rumination on contemporary art in Reinke's unmistakable, disarming tone. He explains that video projections in galleries function mainly as placeholders, you know - they say something like, 'Watch this space for a while until something of interest, urn, can conceivably appear They want to hold our attention without taking up any space - any physical, architectural space, you know - or any cognitive space either. The chapter of the book he's gluing together (so you won't have to worry about reading it) will give its title to a series of artworks: the book-object on a plinth, Anal Masturbation and Object Loss (Sculpture); this video; and an maybe like a mirror installation in a corner, with a projection of a slow pan of flowers in late bloom, almost abstract : Anal Masturbation and Object Loss (Phceholder). I will be arguing that experimental media art was doing just fine. There's still lots of wonderful experimental film and video around that is linear, or to use a video term, single-channel .. Lots of great work that deserves our attention and hence, our love - to paraphrase Andre Bazin. There's nothing wrong with it. However, many media artists are now making their work with the gallery in mind. The institutional venues for single-channel experimental media are shifting from the festival/distributor circuit to gallery/museum circuit, primarily for economic reasons. Thus many artists seem to feel forced to make work for installation, whether that inclination is aesthetically necessary or not. I argue that the current artworld climate has made aesthetic concerns secondary to financial ones. Further, I disagree with notions that installation is more material or critical than theatrical screening; however, aesthetic issues of interest do arise with regard to attention, distraction, and what I'll call cognitive consumerism. Before going on, let me give a definition of experimental media. It includes films and videos that experiment formally with the medium, from film formats to low-end video formats to HD to mobile and online platforms. It includes experiments, drawn from critique of cinema and TV, with sound, montage, structure, reflexivity, etc. It experiments with the relationship between fiction and documentary: presence, index, performance. Indeed some of the richest experimentation now seems to work with performativity: cinema as an event, from framing to reception. Experimentation also regards content: experimental narrative, essay films, experimental documentary, certain political work. A negative definition: it's whatever doesn't fit into standards for commercially viable fiction and documentary; it's any short that isn't a calling-card film. I'll focus solely on single-channel work, not multiple-screen or interactive work. THE FINANCIAL SITUATION Experimental media artists are producing more work at the same time that paying venues are diminishing. Facing the decision of where their work is best placed, in the movie theater or in the gallery, they ask: Where will my work be best received? What will be the quantity and quality of audience? Will I be paid, and if so, how much? If they take the theater route, their work will likely appear as a single projection in a darkened room, in festivals and one-off screenings. Most experimental films do not fit the commercial standards of the film festival circuit, but there are excellent festivals and series that are dedicated to experimental work, such as Ann Arbor; Images in Toronto; Views from the AvantGarde at the New York Film Festival; Rotterdam; Kino Arsenale in Berlin; Oberhausen. Many experimental festivals have closed down in recent years.1 Still, most cities have a couple of modest venues for showing artists' cinema, with small but ardent audiences. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,254
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,993

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,236
Écart entre enseignants0,178 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMillennium film journalMême sujetCinema and Media StudiesTravaux en français237 207