Up and Down: The Queer and Affective Potential of (the) Transition (from the Perspectives of a Director, Sound Designer, and Lighting Designer)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is an exploration of the ideas galvanizing our practice-based research. Structured as a dialogue between a director, sound designer and lighting designer, this piece explores how the nexus of queerness, affect and performance informs each of our specialist areas. We articulate how affect and queer theories drive our individual enquiries and use our experience of working together on the Australian premiere production of Lachlan Philpott’s promiscuous/cities to consider the relationships between our disciplines. We focus on moments of transition—common components of any theatre piece—as a way of interrogating how this interdisciplinary dialogue works within the development of the work and performance outcomes. Throughout this dialogue, we ask what the state of transition does for each of us when we make or see a piece of work—whether this be an experience of temporal instability, a rhythmic movement into a new state or a form of punctuation—and we consider how we can approach affect and queer thinking through these transitional moments. These moments of possibility are what excite us and push us to consider the potential of our individual practices through the experience of collaborative performance-making.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it