MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318256862 · doi:10.3368/m.114.3.448

Slow Aesthetics, Fraught Intimacy, and Queer Time in the German Queer New Wave:<i>Sturmland</i>and<i>Neubau</i>

2022· article· en· W4318256862 on OpenAlexaff
Kyle Frackman

Bibliographic record

VenueMonatshefte · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsTeck (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerGermanAestheticsArtArt historyGender studiesHistorySociologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes two contemporary German films for their use of slow aesthetic techniques and their engagement with displays of and challenges to notions of intimacy. Appealing to the critical concept of “precarious intimacies,” the article argues that Sturmland (2014, directed by A´ da´m Csa´szi) and Neubau (2020, directed by Johannes Maria Schmit) employ techniques of slow cinema to manipulate the films’ use, and the audience’s perception, of queer temporality. The two films are part of a transnational new wave of queer cinema first identified in 2012 and show hallmarks of slow cinema like long takes, elliptical dialog, sparse non-diegetic soundtracks, and other elements that foster a contemplative tone. Sturmland and Neubau concentrate on diverse intimate circumstances in their plots, which demonstrate that both the narrative and the medium have ramifications for perceptions of queer potential, eroticism, non-conforming gender, and physical expressions of desire. (KF)

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueMonatshefteSame topicEuropean history and politicsFrench-language works237,207