MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002161369 · doi:10.1163/187180010x547639

Idolatry and the Civil Covenant of Photography: On the Practice of Exhibiting Images of Suffering, Degradation, and Death

2010· article· en· W2002161369 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueImages · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdolatryCovenantVoyeurismJudaismConscienceExhibitionPhotographyCovertArtAestheticsSociologyVisual artsLawPsychoanalysisPsychologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceReligious studiesTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exhibiting perpetrator photographs of suffering and death presents a series of curatorial problems for museums and galleries. Unlike photojournalist images taken to inform a social conscience, the initial creation and circulation of such photographs have historically been implicated in the violence they depict. Beyond skepticism as to photography’s capacity to arouse a moral impulse, exhibitions of perpetrator photographs have been criticized for promoting voyeurism and extending suffering through the reiteration of images of human degradation. I consider how a problem central to Jewish theology might speak to such curatorial concerns, specifically the question of what constitutes the practice of idolatry. In this context I explore issues related to the ethics of visuality, developing the implications of Leora Batnitzky’s reading of Franz Rosenzweig’s cultural writings for my own concerns regarding the museological practice of public history.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it