Expanded cinema: Notes on twentieth-century encounters with art, science and technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article will suggest that the conceptual framework of expanded cinema in the mid-twentieth century, particularly the radical performances of the UK-based Filmaktion group, has parallels in the scientific formulations of the time. The argument will be made that the intellectual breadth of the movement extends beyond the limitations of the art world and that the work produced made an important contribution to the history of ideas and, as such, belongs to the larger body of twentieth-century thought. The era was marked by unprecedented technological change, from mechanical innovation when cinema was in its infancy, through the advent of electronic communication systems to the proliferation of accessible computer technology and the de-militarization of the Internet. In both the arts and sciences the changes that accompanied these developments can be characterized as a shift away from the static representations of nature during the nineteenth century towards a more dynamic, process-based description of the world made possible by the introduction of high-speed computer technology. Reference will be made to sociologist/philosopher of science Andrew Pickering’s observation of a transition in the sciences from the ‘representational’ models of the late nineteenth century to the ‘performative’ models of the present day, which will be shown to run parallel to a similar shift in twentieth century art practice. Drawing on Norbert Weiner’s theory of cybernetics, quantum mechanics, chaos theory, the ideas of Gregory Bateson and the ‘embodied’ sciences, which began to evolve at this time, the discussion will link these scientific developments to the expanded cinematic works of artists such as Annabel Nicolson, Malcolm le Grice, William Raban, Anthony McCall and Lis Rhodes, and to new media artists such as David Rokeby, Lise Autogena, Thomson & Craighead and Susan Collins. The article will seek to demonstrate that expanded cinema helped turn the moving image into a truly twentieth century art form, establishing a strong conceptual foundation for the process-based practices of the 1980s and 1990s and anticipating the embodied science and new media works of the contemporary period.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".