MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281480274 · doi:10.32920/ifmj.v2i2.1612

Cinemanhatta

2022· article· en· W4281480274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sean Michael Landers

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Film and Media Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityAestheticsSociologyGeniusExpression (computer science)The artsAmusementEpistemologyVisual artsComputer scienceArtLiteraturePsychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both as a concept and a practice, remix has become enshrined in media theory and production. Using an existing creative expression as materials to produce a new creative expression, remix highlights how culture operates through a continual circulation of shared elements. Remix reincorporates this practice into the present culture as an alternative to the dominant logic of the culture industries. However, as a useful principle applied in a general way, the specific cultural and historical conditions of remix’s origins become obscured and mythologized, obscuring how emergence and creativity function as part of culture in specific conditions. Moreover, although we frame remix as an alternative or oppositional practice, it remains compatible with the logic of creativity as the work of the genius or auteurs. It reinforces the idea of art as an expressive object that can be commodified for the consumption of an audience. The time is right to rethink what the term ‘remix’ does and what it accomplishes. Remix presents an alternative to the dominant mode of production, but can it offer a transformative opposition that not only remakes culture, but remakes the ways we make culture? If not, what can? This presentation offers a complementary concept I call “recreative practice”, meant in the sense of re-creative (re-new-ing through creativity) as well as in the sense of recreational (“to refresh oneself by some amusement”). It emerges from a synthesis of Dewey’s writing on the aesthetic experience (1934/2005), Williams’ theory of the residual, dominant and emergent (1977), and Barad’s call responsive/responsible theory (2012). The production of something that has never been is influenced by what has come before, and reception is framed by understanding of what is familiar to us. Recreative practice recognizes that the production of aesthetic experience does not belong to a class apart – culture is ordinary, everyone is creative, and we are constantly generating and circulating culture. Nor are theorists and artists exempt – we are inextricably entangled in the world we seek to transform, and our work, too, is part of a process of the everyday and the ordinary. To further demonstrate recreative practice, I draw from my forthcoming dissertation, An Effective Dream is a Reality, as well as several years’ experimentation with algorithmic cinema. I give this a focus through presentation of speculative project: Cinemanhatta. Cinemanhatta is a speculative proposal building on Manhatta (1921) as a foundation. An antecedent of recreative practice, Manhatta drew on existing creative traditions in a way that created new possibilities for meaning-making and influenced the conditions for meaning-making itself. Cinemanhatta honors that tradition and exemplifies recreative practice by proposing three interrelated projects, each inspired by a significant creative effort: Heidi Rae Cooley’s Finding Augusta and the accompanying Augusta App (2014), Perry Bard’s Man With A Movie Camera: Global Remake (2007-present), and Barbara Lattanzi’s HF Critical Mass (2002). These projects work together to produce a material-semiotic performance of exchange and collaboration, using a set of recreative practices to construct a community of inquiry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3480.076

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Film and Media Journal→Same topicDigital Games and Media→French-language works237,207→