Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The performance entitled Chew, Drink and Spit: A Book Review took place in a studio in Vancouver, British Columbia, as a response to the 2012 publication of The Last Art College (MIT Press) by Canadian conceptual artist Garry Neil Kennedy. An urgent need was felt to address the typical ahistorical and nostalgic fashion with which Mr. Kennedy presented “his” period of conceptual art and pedagogy at the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design (NSCAD) as the height of Canadian conceptualism and arts-based education. The action combined performance and book review. Sitting at a table, each page where Garry Neill Kennedy’s name appeared in his book was partially chewed and spitted back into a peanut butter container labelled “Last Art College.” This article explores whether the protesting body, as it consumed and regurgitated the “Last Art College,” can be read and interpreted as an embodied epistemology. Can flesh and embodied critique offer a new and different dynamic perspective on the “Last Art College” as the epitome of art serving as capital in a market-driven profession? Chew, Drink and Spit: A Book Review will serve as a point to discuss questions of historical critique within the socio-political and economic framework of the art school and university.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".