Archaeologizing Art History: An Encounter with <i>Foucault’s Philosophy of Art: A Genealogy of Modernity</i>, Joseph Tanke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DoesFoucault have a philosophy of art?Although Foucault scholars are certainly aware of the philosopher's fragmentary writings on painting, architecture, music, literature, and film, few would have thought that these amounted to a philosophy of art.Indeed, one might think that Foucault's frequent discussions of artworks do not so much constitute a philosophy of art as they illustrate the kinds of epistemological and political arguments for which Foucault is best known.Foucault's writings on architecture, for instance, arguably reflect less a concern for the aesthetics of built spaces than for the power relations that these structures instantiate.In fact, "art" for the purposes of Tanke's study is limited to painting and photography, with a brief mention of some Warhol films; the book thus does not include discussions of Foucault's writings and interviews on architecture, literature, music, or feature-length films such as René Allio's Moi, Pierre Rivière.Despite these delimitations of his project, Tanke draws on a surprising number of rarely read and sometimes untranslated works, as well as the familiar analyses of Velásquez's Las Meninas and Magritte's Ceci n'est pas une pipe.Reading Tanke's book, we also learn that Foucault taught a course on fifteenth-century Italian painting during his time in Tunisia and that he intended to write a book-length study of Manet's paintings.In unearthing these little-known aspects of Foucault's intellectual biography as well as a number of neglected texts-some of
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".