Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vancouver Art Gallery Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada March 18-August 13, 2000 organized by BildMuseet, Ume[dot{a}] Sweden The Mirror's Edge is proposed as a reflection in a destabilized hall of mirrors in which real arid imaginary play off each other infinitely. The viewer is caught in middle in a kind of Chaplinesque disorientation between image and fantasy. When curator Okwui Enwezor talks about the artist's return back into world as material rather than a virtual space, he includes viewers as well as images and objects in this new physicality. This materiality encompasses a space within which projected image is focused and into which viewer enters as an actor on stage--in this case, gallery itself is a site for artists' reflections on culture and its myths. At start of twentieth century, play of light was breaking up paint on canvas and phantasm of projected image was startling audiences in theaters in Europe and North America. This is era that Jonathan Crary identifies as beginning of modernism and a time that Theodor Adorno associates with occultation of image in which illusion constitutes itself in realm of absolute without having to renounce its claim to image world. [1] Modernism privileged subjectivity, of viewer through denial of body, sitting quietly in theater seats or standing respectfully in museum. The Mirror's Edge straddles turn of twenty-first century, and separation of viewer from physical reality that modernism required is no longer necessary. The photographic illusion is now incorporated and thoroughly accommodated as a factor of scale and a mechanism of production and display. Today effect of projections is tamed, almost quaint in compariso n to phantasms of that earlier era. An aspect of work that becomes more apparent is disorientation of body within this framework of illusion--the bumbling, gross physicality of body in space--by turning back and forth between two projected images, moving closer or further away to discover effects of illusion, rigidly clicking in front of a computer screen or wandering in constructed spaces of gallery. Enwezor's catalog essay characterizes art representing history as a of mise-en-sc[grave{e}]nes. It is hard to imagine a more perfect illustration than Thomas Demand's large-scale chromogenic prints from 1997-98 of meticulously constructed modern scenarios. In this series modernism is presented as a construction of social arid material space. The images provide a prespective on mathematical precision of digital imaging that they emulate in material form. Of note is an image of a well-clipped lawn, Rasen/Lawn, 1998, both for its amazing illusion of reality and its humorous reference to quotidian forms of modern architectural space and pervasive manicured green. These images are more captivating than equally beautiful images by Thomas Struth, Galleria dell' Accademia II, Venezia (1995) and San Zaccaria (1995) that situate viewer in a more relentless and didactic mirroring of viewing viewers viewing history in form of representations of birth and death of Christ. Liisa Roberts's piece to derive an approach (1998-99) includes two 16mm film projectors and looped images projected onto two elegantly draped backdrops. To view piece one must walk through a narrow door and in between two rear-screen projections so that images seem to deflect off of you in both directions. A sensor at door momentarily turns projection off as viewers go in and out of room. Viewing piece is considerably frustrating. The seductive illusion of film is entirely defeated by one's own intrusion into space. Roberts's talk at opening symposium was equally defeating. …
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.383 | 0.195 |
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".