Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishnets & Desire: Performing the Neoburlesque is a reflection upon the art installation and performance piece of the same name, and reflects upon neoburlesque performance genre, through the lens of the author's primary research of creating these works. Written as a piece of per formative scholarship, this paper outlines the creative process of the author's project, and the theatrical history, theory, and methodology behind it. Fishnets & Desire is a reflection of performance and queer theories, meditating upon the specific art forms of burlesque striptease and drag, and how they enact gender performativity. Neoburlesque is a tongue-in-cheek and satirical form of expression, which lampoons gender stereotypes, and societal expectations. The current art form draws upon cultural nostalgia for the kitsch of burlesque striptease that was performed in theatres, and gentleman's clubs from the 1920s-60s. Through the use of comedic exaggeration and hyperbolic gender presentation, burlesque seeks to undermine conventional notions of femininity, and deconstruct them. The author's performance piece also sought to engage with the energetic relationship between the audience and the burlesque performer's reciprocal gaze; and neoburlesque as a genre of carnivalesque spectacle. As an integration of live performance, projected video, and photography, Fishnets & Desire created a space in which the audience simultaneously experienced the feeling of being on stage, as well as actively watched (and thus, participating in) a burlesque striptease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".