Architecture of memorialisation: the Spitfire and the making of a memorial icon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the Second World War, the Supermarine Spitfire played a pivotal role defending the British nation, notably during the 1940 Battle of Britain. Drawing from the aircraft’s historiography and its continuing afterlife, we discuss the constitutive elements supporting the Spitfire’s transformation from war plane to memorial icon for the British wartime experience. In the context of this machine as memorial, the elements comprising what we refer to as the architecture of memorialisation are narrative permanence, enchantment of war technology, dialogic geometry of remembrance and commemorative adaptive capacity. These elements work to silence war, killing and death and in so doing justify a nation’s values, its moral compass. While these four elements may be unique to this aircraft, the architecture of memorialisation is a conceptual framework for analysing other types of memorials including those that are contested or which reflect regimes of power or cultures of remembrance very different to those of the United Kingdom (UK). Diverse social and cultural contexts will reveal different constitutive elements of the architecture of memorialisation.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".