MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4385591365 · doi:10.1353/esc.2020.a903557

Archives, Intimacy, Embodiment: Encountering the Sound Subject in the Literary Archive

2020· article· en· W4385591365 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Julia Polyck-O'Neill

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueDiverse Musicological Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSubject (documents)Active listeningHistorySpace (punctuation)WatsonVisual artsSociologyMedia studiesArt historyAestheticsArtCommunicationComputer scienceLinguisticsPhilosophyLibrary science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Archives, Intimacy, Embodiment:Encountering the Sound Subject in the Literary Archive Julia Polyck-O'Neill (bio) It is february 2022. I am working in Special Collections and Rare Books at Simon Fraser University (sfu), newly reopened after a long closure due to the global covid-19 pandemic. It is my first time physically in an archive since well before March 2020 when most physical institutional spaces were closed as part of widespread public health measures. The space is quiet and quite warm, as the entire floor is enclosed, externally enveloped in a white waterproof, protective membrane defending against the pervasive Vancouver rain. This makes the space feel even more alien and isolated from the rest of campus, which itself is much quieter than usual due to the pandemic. The microclimate is womblike and slightly oppressive in its lack of air circulation; a pervasive sense of stillness and envelopment heightens the experience of being in this space. These effects dramatize my activity in the chambers of the collections and allows for a sense of sharpened focus. I am looking at the Lisa Robertson fonds in person for the first time. More importantly, I am listening in the Lisa Robertson fonds for the first time. The addition of sonic, vocal layers in the form of sound recordings to an archival collection contributes meaningfully to what Linda Morra calls the "affective economies" (after Sara Ahmed) of the archive, which are [End Page 47] "shaped by the effects of encounters … and by reorientation(s) between subject and object" (2). As Jason Camlot observes in Phonopoetics, hearing a recording of a subject in an archival setting can also be a "strangely real" encounter, developing "an experience of real-time processing" that few other media can reproduce (3). The sensory aspects of sound in the archives have the potential to create a sense of proximity not commonly found in conventional textual archives, which are generally imagined to be near-silent spaces for monastic contemplation. Additionally, sound, as an aural medium, has a unique relationship to performance, which registers a form of embodiment for the listener and leads to a sense of intangible and nuanced, embodied reception. Building a sense of closeness and immediacy between the archive-user and the research object or subject, sound recordings generate new forms of intimacy and connection, enabling the user to access nuanced details otherwise obfuscated or overlooked in conventional literary archives. Considering the archive according to Julietta Singh's proposition that "the archive is a stimulus between myself and myself" (26), this essay will reflect on my time spent working with Lisa Robertson's archives. Recounting recent theorizations of sound as both object and material for the archive, I consider how the addition of sound recordings enables archive-users to access and reconsider the literary research subject as a "subject," a complex being that exists beyond the confines of texts and textual records. This allows for further examination of how what Katherine McLeod terms "a proximity to voice" (128) enriches the experience of encountering the subject in the archive by unconcealing aspects of embodiment while adding affective and uncanny dimensions to the encounter. Special Collections To look at and listen to the Lisa Robertson fonds in sfu's collections, I first needed special permission from Robertson. Within the fonds description, the "Terms of Governing Access" (2022) state that "With the exception of published materials and related ephemera, and proofs and page proofs of subsequently published manuscripts, access to papers and notebooks is restricted to researchers who have obtained permission from Lisa Robertson, as long as she is still living" (Fortier, Zerkee, and Wieland 4).1 Seeing as we have worked together in the past and are on amicable terms, she granted permission readily, even offering to accompany me in my journey [End Page 48] through her materials as needed from a distance, although she warned me, as warmly as possible, that some of the materials I had been hoping to examine are confidential and off limits to all, possibly until well after her death, or possibly forever. This made sense, as she is only sixty years of age, and many of the documents in her files represent intimate ties...

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)0,000
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: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,659
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,718

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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

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 Opus0,104
Tête enseignante GPT0,240
Écart entre enseignants0,136 · 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'étudeQualitatif
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
Publié2020
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetDiverse Musicological StudiesTravaux en français237 207