De la portée politique des œuvres d’art. Bourdieu sur le chemin de Francfort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On pense souvent que les deux sociologies critiques de l’art, celle de Pierre Bourdieu et celle de l’École de Francfort, n’entretiennent aucun rapport (en raison de l’absence effective de citations ou de rappels à la théorie critique de la part de Pierre Bourdieu). Mais des affinités importantes existent au niveau de la problématique à travers laquelle Pierre Bourdieu construit le potentiel conflictuel de la création artistique : à la condition de dépasser le mythe du « créateur incréé » et lorsque, comme dans les cas de Gustave Flaubert ou d’Édouard Manet, elle déconstruit les principes de vision et de division du monde social, la création se charge de significations politiques. Cette proposition trouve des échos importants dans l’École de Francfort, entre la critique de l’illusion du « génie bourgeois » dont Max Horkheimer et Theodor W. Adorno pensent trouver une figure archaïque dans le mythe d’Ulysse et les sirènes, et les espoirs placés dans la révolution dodécaphonique d’Arnold Schönberg.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".