Remasters of American Comics: Sequential Art as New Media in the Transformative Museum Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter includes a 2009 essay by multi-faceted University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign professor Damian Duffy highlighting the curatorial philosophies that avoid confronting the conceptual challenge of bringing the comics medium into the museum by attempting to fit comics, to one extent or another, into traditional fine art frameworks, including as examples the 2003 Contemporary Art Museum Houston exhibition <italic>Splat, Boom, Pow!</italic>, <italic>Masters of American Comics</italic> 2005, UCLA Hammer Museum and Museum of Contemporary Art, <italic>Comic Release!</italic> from Carnegie Mellon University, and his own curatorial work in partnership with John Jennings on the exhibitions <italic>Other Heroes: African American Comics Creators, Characters, and Archetypes</italic>. This chapter discusses new media, if we still need canons, comics versus fine art, comics as non-art, lone genius versus collaboration, display tactics, narrative, and racial inclusion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".