The aesthetics of astonishment and contemplation in the early British scenic film
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of early cinema has been strongly influenced by Tom Gunning and André Gaudreault’s ‘cinema of attractions’ model, where films produced before approximately 1906 were valued primarily because of their ability to put a view on display rather than as a vehicle for storytelling. This model of spectatorship, established by both the gaze of the spectator and the recurring look of the subjects on screen, engendered a kind of exhibitionism that was in stark contrast to both the voyeuristic drive embedded in institutional modes of narrative absorption, and earlier models of aesthetic experience, which were characterized as contemplative, because the curiosity derived from each attraction remained only momentarily and usually was induced by a visual shock. This paper will interrogate the distinction made by the second set of criteria by analyzing how many early ‘scenics’ produced in Great Britain constructed a dialectic between a state of detached contemplation and visceral immersion. It will do so by drawing on questions about the role of proximity, distance and point of view invoked by the model of spectatorship described as part of the formulation for the Romantic sublime. This early conceptualization of the relationship between subject and spectacle becomes a framework that could allow both historians and theorists to better understand the link between shock and contemplation in the realm of early film aesthetics and more broadly in the domain of landscape aesthetics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it