Bibliographic record
Abstract
The American art critic Eleanor Heartney notes that contemporary artists who seem to have been most influenced by Christian themes and iconography are those who have been raised as Roman Catholics.2She explains the affinity between visual art and Catholicism by suggesting that image-based theology cultivated a rudimentary visual iconography in the formative years of artists that produced lasting influences on their lives and production.The work of artists such as Kiki Smith and Andres Serrano, amongst others, foreground the pain and pleasures of the human body through explicit references to religious imagery of an almost Baroque intensity.The resurgence of religious imagery in contemporary art can be seen as symptomatic of a collective disturbance centred on the body and on the fear of death.Catholicism, in its opulent practices and imagery, lends art a ready-made symbolic language with which to express and imagine a type of spirituality that does not dismiss the body but valorizes its struggles.In the central sacrament of the Eucharist-the miracle of the Transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body of Christ-the body as both material and immaterial substance is affirmed.Similarly, the theological concepts of the incarnation and the resurrection both denote transmigration between physical and non-physical realities.Focusing on the body, this vision seems anachronistic in the context of our technologized times.Seen through Mikhail
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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".