Escaping “The Organism, Signifiance, and Subjectification” in the Recounting Huronia Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Describing creative activity undertaken by researchers and co-researcher survivors in the context of the Recounting Huronia project, this paper extends existing literature on Deleuze & Guattari and disability arts by exploring how artistic activity provides opportunities for escape from the constraints of what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) describe as the three central strategies by which restrictive systems capture bodies, namely the stratifications of “the organism, signifiance, and subjectification.” Examined in this paper are the specific ways in which one survivor’s involvement in storybook making, poetry, and performance lead to the bundle “percepts” and “affects” in such a way as to generate what Deleuze and Guattari (1994) describe as artistic “monuments.” Far from being constituted by fixities, such monuments provide key pathways for potentially liberatory disarticulations of the restrictive organism, for experimentation in the face of limiting signifiance, and new individuations beyond institutionally coded subjectifications.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".