MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128095067 · doi:10.3138/cras-2020-013

<i>Fleabag,</i> Modernism, and New Television

2021· article· en· W3128095067 on OpenAlex
Мартин Шустер

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernityModernism (music)Context (archaeology)SituatedPhenomenonPaintingHistoryArtBridge (graph theory)AestheticsArt historyLiteraturePhilosophyComputer scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reflects on the recent prominence of direct address—characters speaking directly to the camera—within new television. With particular reference to Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s Fleabag (BBC Three, 2016–19), the phenomenon of direct address is in this context situated amid the broader history of pictorial art, especially painting and the problem of theatricality first introduced by Denis Diderot in the eighteenth century and taken up in the last century by Michael Fried. The article concludes by showing how Fleabag’s use of direct address both fits neatly into this art history and moves beyond it, showing especially how Fleabag’s use of direct address substantially comments on modernity, on the status of art (especially new television), and even on the status of religion.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it