Artaud’s Hyeroglyphic Sign and Böhme’s Aesthetics of Atmosphere: The Semiotic Legacy of the Avant-Garde’s Recognition of the Materiality of Sound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Materiality of the sign/sound in theatre appears when various sensory materials remain on the side of the signifier, not trying to reach the signified but energetically pulsating from the stage instead. The semiotics of sound would benefit from exploring the process where the theatrical sign or sound is caught naked in its flight between deliverance and reception, not yet clothed in its signifying dress. Such a semiotics follows oral/aural signs becoming other signs in the area where the senses signify. I suggest that voice and stage sound/noise figure as catalysts of an intermedial flux between sensual, visual, kinetic, and architectural elements of performance, marking a legacy of the avant-garde recognition of the materiality of sound. I demonstrate this using Artaud’s concept of a hieroglyphic idiom as the “expression in space [in which] objects themselves begin to speak through the collusion of objects, silences, shouts and rhythms,” and through Boehme's aesthetics of atmospheres as the art of the set that creates a poetics/ technè of postdramatic theatre focused on orality/aurality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".