MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4231363058 · doi:10.1353/ctr.2011.0002

Memory

2011· article· en· W4231363058 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Pil Hansen, Bruce Barton

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Theatre Review · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueTheatre and Performance Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésForgettingReconstructive memoryEmbodied cognitionCognitive scienceAutobiographical memoryCollective memoryPsychologyImplicit memoryCognitive psychologyEpisodic memoryPerceptionChildhood memoryAestheticsCognitionRecallEpistemologyArtNeurosciencePhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Memory Pil Hansen and Bruce Barton Performing is memory / memory as imagination or conditioning / forgetting as poetic relief or loss of self / multiple selves effecting each other across parallel times / the integration or transcendence of past, present, and future / ancestral memory / the biological memory of body functions / the ethics of memory / the recontextualization of memory / creative constructions of autobiographical memory/ collective embodiment of autobiographical memories / shifts in perception caused by the recycling of memory / how the archive affects the process of memory / the integration of lived and mediated memories. Over the past ten years, the generally accepted understanding of human memory has shifted radically, reflecting popularized articulations of recent advances in the cognitive sciences. These advances are in part a result of new brain imaging technology (MRI) and in part the result of a revived interest in the understandings of memory (established and potential) articulated in phenomenological philosophy and its direct influences (Husserl, Merleau-Ponty, James, Bergson). In simple terms, the mentioned shift is from memory understood as stored experiences, episodes, and knowledge from the past that can be recalled (as memories of the past) to the much more complex understanding that memory is embodied and neural processes of perception that are recycled and changed implicitly when perceiving in the present. While the relationship between cultural memory and theatre has been addressed extensively—by Canadian scholarship in particular—questions of how the dynamics and mechanics of memory inform and act on creative strategies in Canadian dance, performance, and theatre have rarely been raised.1 This issue of CTR is a response to a junction between this perceived shift in understanding and a growing body of Canadian performance projects that involve artistic questions and strategies of memory. We invited a wide range of artists and scholars to discuss how conceptualizations of memory inform contemporary Canadian performance. Intriguingly, while we received only a small number of academic proposals, we were inundated by enthusiastic responses and pitches from practitioners (so many as to make the selection process a very difficult one). As is evident from our final roster of articles, simplistic and outdated understandings of memory are hugely challenged and split open by practices that are acutely aware of memory as a complex process that affects artists and audiences in multiple ways. When teasing out the routes by which the different contributors [End Page 3] approach memory, an exciting network of interconnected themes arises—one that has the power and potential to pry apart questions about how and what performance processes can affect. This evocative network does not have a beginning or centre; our introduction, however, must of necessity choose a point of entry. The understanding that performing is memory is most explicitly addressed in Maiko Bae Yamamoto's piece on Theatre Replacement's production-in-process Dress me up in your love. Her creative team is challenged by the dilemma that even when delivering unscripted and in-part improvised material, the act of performing repeats and often dilutes discoveries of compelling connections to source material initially made in rehearsal. When this source material, furthermore, is a collection of emotional and personal memories associated with "Outfits of Significance" (donated by others or the performers themselves), the layers of repetition and possible dilution multiply. Accepting the act of repeating memory as a condition of performance, but deliberately troubling the notion of presence, Ame Henderson asks how a performer can "be 'in the moment' while also processing what has happened before and [...] projecting towards the moment that has not yet arrived?" One attempt at a solution is found in the "Performance Recipe" of 300 TAPES, in which Henderson's Public Recordings outlines reusable performance generating systems and compositional procedures. Another can be discovered in the performer Marie Claire Forté and dramaturge Jacob Zimmer's discussion of relay, a dance project also directed by Henderson. In these projects, Henderson and her collaborators devise performance strategies of retelling personal stories or remembering movements danced in the past based in the understanding that the act of remembering is "a function mostly of our imaginations." When Henderson connects this understanding with "the impossibility of repetition in spite of our best efforts," her position resonates directly with the neurobiologist Gerald...

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut 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: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,224
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,000

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,003
Communication savante0,0080,006
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,2240,100

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 GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,167 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Theatre ReviewMême sujetTheatre and Performance StudiesTravaux en français237 207