Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay examines the notion of the fantastic in Debora Vogel’s work. I argue that the fantastic for Vogel is simultaneously a novel artistic form and a form of life, as well as a singular use of language; it is both a “trait” of modernity and thinking of modernity. The fantastic is analyzed as a key term in the author’s understanding of modern design of space and objects through discussions of “Dwelling in its Psychic and Social Function” (1932), the critic’s essay on lived space. I demonstrate that Vogel’s reflections and theorizing of the fantastic are not necessarily aimed at the development of pure theory and concepts but rather at the performance of the fantastic in the author’s own theory-praxis through the lens of Vogel’s essay on poetics, “White Words in Poetry” (1930). The essay discusses various types of the fantastic which finds itself between matter-of-factness and phantasm: the fantastic of ingenuity, the fantastic of asymmetry, the fantastic of color, and the fantastic of simplicity. All of these different types set forth the unconcealment of truth.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".