Less is More Work: A Governmentality Analysis of Authenticity Within Minimalism Discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At its core, this is a project about the contemporary crisis of authenticity. Using minimalism discourse as a site to explore this crisis, my research into the minimalist lifestyle and its critique of consumerism is guided by two questions. First, how is the concept of authenticity mobilized within minimalism discourse? And second, how does the notion of authenticity contribute to governing the minimalist lifestyle and shaping the minimalist subject? To explore these questions a selection of self-help texts, or pedagogical lifestyle resources, are used. The discursive sites explored herein include guru books, Reddit forums, a documentary, Instagram posts, TED talks, and media coverage on the minimalist lifestyle. These diverse data sites are analyzed using mixedmethods including discourse analysis, frame analysis, and elements of grounded theory, and are shaped by a governmentality approach to theory and methodology. emphasis on consuming to meet basic needs rather than satisfying wants. These are deemed to be more natural, and therefore authentic, ways to consume.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".