Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his introduction to Documenta 12, Roger Buergel designates bare life as a major motif, aligning it with the radical separation between painful subjection and joyous liberation. I suggest in this paper that this large-scale international exhibition is a prescriptive framework for Giorgio Agamben’s highly qualified juridical concept, since it may actually help to distort a concept emphasizing an element that resists representation. However, Buergel’s willingness to find a positive aspect of the state of exception is not incompatible with Agamben’s notion of a limit figure that eludes inscription in language. Bare life is open to art insofar as both occupy a zone of indistinction: the first designates a being devoid of any representable identity that avoids co-optation by the state, while the second is shifting its focus away from the object and towards the elusive spaces that can be documented but never shown. In this paper, I investigate the often ambiguous ways that the concept of bare life has been extended in discussions of a new politics based on irreparable singularity. I also explore several works of art in seeking possible alternatives to the institutional framing of bare life, including a performance that takes on the notion of invisibility in a somewhat literal way by eliminating photographic evidence of the event.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.102 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".