MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285013835 · doi:10.22215/etd/2022-14967

Resistivity in Contemporary Art Biennials: A Synchronic Analysis

2022· dissertation· en· W4285013835 on OpenAlexaff
Amy Bruce

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoriographyResistance (ecology)NarrativePoliticsInterpretation (philosophy)HistoryGeographyArtLiteratureArchaeologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyEcologyLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dominant art historical narrative of contemporary art biennials starts with the Venice Biennale.Taking the Venice Biennale as the biennial template, form, and medium, for universalizing biennial history is clearly problematic, and the concept of "biennials of resistance," as proposed by curator Ranjit Hoskote, has become an important catalyst for writing non-and counter-Venetian histories of biennials.This history of counter-biennials situates "biennials of resistance" in a parallel, or a tangential anti-/postcolonial canon to the lineage established by the Venice Biennale.Hoskote's proposed counter narrative approach limits and ultimately maintains divisive Eurocentric biases.I argue for re-framing the geographic interpretation of global South to collapse and expand the "biennials of resistance" framework and problematize the anti-/postcolonial canon that constitutes it through, what I call, biennial resistivity.Biennial resistivity utilises the qualifiers of the "biennial of resistance" to become a conceptual rather than geographical framework.As this dissertation demonstrates, biennial resistivity amplifies the post/decolonial resistive potential of a biennial given its local specificities and complicates the global South dichotomy and static historical interpretations of the anti-/postcolonial biennial.Moreover, I propose to study biennial historiography not by focusing on the "waves" biennial historiography, and instead to utilize a synchronic analysis according to host years.Synchronic analysis mobilises the temporal biennial model (of every two years) using a horizontal, relational, and comparative approach to elucidate (art) iii historical, political, social, and cultural complexities that constitute biennials at across locales, while attending to their specific histories.The time frame between 2017-2018 situates my study, where I examine three different biennials as comparative case studies: #00Bienal de La Habana in Havana, Cuba; the 15 th Istanbul Biennial in Istanbul, Turkey; and documenta 14, in Kassel, Germany.I argue each of these biennials are "biennials of resistance" by way of their resistivity.Moreover, I demonstrate a new conceptualization of "biennials of resistance" through a synchronic methodological paradigm to shift the study of biennials to move past entrenched Eurocentric historiographic epistemologies.Birgit Hopfener.Their guidance, feedback,

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.332 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 topicSport and Mega-Event Impacts→French-language works237,207→