MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465421061

The domestic spaceship : visions of future home-making in the production design of Serenity’s communal living spaces

2015· article· en· W2465421061 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sorcha O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Repository (Kingston University London) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiving roomSpace (punctuation)Visual artsCrewMedia studiesAestheticsAdvertisingSociologyArtComputer scienceEngineeringBusinessArchitectural engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wash: That sounds like something out of science fiction! Zoe: You live in a spaceship, dear. Wash: So? ‘Objects in Space’ Episode 14, Firefly, 2002 The interior of the International Space Station has become familiar to millions through the 2013 Youtube video of Canadian astronaut Commander Hadfield singing a cover of David Bowie’s Space Oddity. The video showed a space station interior densely populated with cables, switches, screens and the technical paraphernalia, with only Hadfield’s guitar and his tiny padded bunk showing any hint of the crew’s personal or domestic lives. Many film and television visualisations of life in space focus on military space craft, with the domestic living arrangements modelled on existing military crew quarters, paying little attention to either private or domestic spaces for small groups. However, this paper will consider one vision of how we might live a future mobile existence in space, based on the interior of the spaceship Serenity, the main set for the short-lived American ‘space western’ TV series Firefly (2002) and the subsequent film Serenity (2005). The Serenity is a rickety, patched-up multi-purpose Firefly-class cargo transport, running dodgy goods between colonised planets in a future where the authoritarian ‘Alliance’ has recently won a war of unification. As well as the science fiction genre conventions of bridge, crew quarters, med-bay and cargo hold, the Serenity also contains a number of communal leisure spaces which function as kitchen, dining room and sitting room for the small group of crew and passengers, reflecting the long term nature of their residence on the ship. This paper will look at the evidence of active home-making processes at work in Serenity’s communal interior, particularly in relation to the transient, precarious existence of the crew. The paper will consider the communal domestic spaces in relation to both the Early American decorating styles and the visions of American homes shown in the Western genre, as well as the attempts to incorporate Asian elements into the design, to reflect the projected American-Chinese governmental alliance. As well as the visual references to other modes of transport such as submarines and airplanes, it considers the influence of mid-century American mobile homes on the design of the space ship itself, providing another layer of cultural context to the show and film. It also looks at the incorporation of mid-century modern design elements into the production design, particularly modernist furniture and layouts influenced by California Modern, and the added layers of meaning that they add to this vision of the future. In analysing the furnishing and decoration of these communal spaces, as well as the way that they are presented on screen, the paper considers production designer Carey Meyer’s efforts to portray a comforting, cosy American domesticity based on the past, and past visions of the future, while also critiquing the way in which these heroic visions have turned into a reality of static mobile homes and a single crowded space station.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.032
Scholarly communication0.0180.012
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Repository (Kingston University London)Same topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207