Par-delà le naturalisme : médiatisation du sublime dans les oeuvres d’Olafur Eliasson et Ryoji Ikeda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the sublime is commonly associated with nature, the historical determinants of this relation are frequently ignored. Art historians and curators who attempt to define a contemporary sublime often anachronistically link recent artworks with modern categories marked by a now contested representation of the world. Such is the case of the “natural sublime,” which emerged around the turn of the eighteenth century and exemplifies what Philippe Descola describes as a “naturalistic” cosmology characterized by a separation between Nature and Culture. Starting from a case study of two recent art installations associated with the sublime, namely The weather project (2003) by Olafur Eliasson and the series systematics and datamatics (2012) by Ryoji Ikeda, this article examines how these works reconfigure the relation between the subject and the world, in order to characterize the contemporaneity of their representation of the sublime. It suggests that these installations help reformulate our interpretation of it by emphasizing the power of technological and digital mediations to connect the human and the non-human worlds.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".