An Ethnography of Collaboration in the Production of the Polyphonic Documentary ‘Can You Feel the Heat?’
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
‘Can You Feel The Heat?’ is the result of an exploration of the role of sound and colour in interactive documentary. It was produced collaboratively by members of the ‘Polyphonic Documentary’ online research group, drawing from 96 video clips on heat and climate change shared by group members for this purpose. Each was motivated by a shared interest in conducting practice-led research on non-linear, interactive forms of non-fictional representation where the language of image and sound was foregrounded over the spoken word. As they worked together over the course of a year, the collaborative methodology they adopted enriched and informed the research process as each experimented both practically and conceptually with the chosen software in response to the research question: ‘Considering the unpredictable outcomes of the non-linear interactive documentary form, how does a creative process driven by a felt response to sound and colour inform eventual meaning?’ For their theoretical framing, the authors of ‘Can You Feel The Heat?’ adopted the Bakhtinian principles of dialogic polyphony and multi-perspectival approaches to the non-linear narrative presented at the project outset by the founders of the ‘Polyphonic Documentary’ research group Aston & Odorico (2018). The non-linear editing software Korsakow, was chosen by the authors based on its potential to provide unpredictable and unexpected juxtapositions of the single narrative units (snu) used in the editing process. This allowed for added meaning to be generated through the editing process as the three researchers explored the possibilities of abstraction and non-verbal meaning-making via juxtaposition and montage. As in a successful linear montage sequence, where meaning is added through the juxtaposition of individually disparate elements, the interactive piece that resulted from the collaboration became more than the sum of its parts. The three researchers were from diverse nationalities, ages, and academic backgrounds, and the combination of their individual knowledge, expertise, and creativity offered their own surprising juxtapositions of ideas and intentions. In the oft-cited experiment of the Russian filmmaker Lev Kuleshov, where two images produced an additional meaning resulting from the juxtaposition (‘one plus one equals three’), ‘Can You Feel the Heat?’ could be seen to demonstrate that one plus one plus one equals five (three artists/researchers) and the added meaning the ‘juxtaposition’ of their collaboration contributed. This paper draws on these principles of montage and juxtaposition to offer an analysis of the relationship between the creative process and the final product, making an argument for montage as a method. It combines descriptions and examples of the practice with extracts from the meeting transcripts and personal notes of each of the authors to present an auto-ethnographic study of the collaborative methodology adopted, the creative output and the shared and individual conclusions reached.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».