Bibliographic record
Abstract
The release of the second series of the HBO hit television series Euphoria was met with large popular culture criticism of the stylization of the teenage experience. In this analysis the method of visual rhetorical analysis is used to demonstrate how visual elements of the television series Euphoria, in its performance, communicates ideas about how Euphoria prescribes audiences a certain way of viewing the experiences of adolescence in a thematically significant way, producing a ‘teenage gaze.’ Euphoria relies on a heavily stylized manifestation of mature themes, described by critics as aesthetic pretensions, to convey a sense of performance that is well suited to the visual rhetorical analysis of color and light, aesthetics of technology, fashion, and setting (Vanity Fair, 2021). This analysis expands on how these visual elements contribute to spectacularized performance, supported by commercial adoption of the teenage image and experience that is oppressive in the othering of real teens and their authentic experiences. In addition to deconstructing spectacle, this analysis focuses on the role of liminality in the visuals presented by Euphoria, and how they negotiate visual and thematic boundaries to produce nostalgia, an essential element of the teenage gaze. The evolution of the teenage gaze, and its study in popular culture contexts, is significant when considering the current sociopolitical environment where youth are often marginalized in the face of crisis. This study of visual rhetoric in Euphoria finds that through the articulation of the teenage gaze amongst mature Euphoria viewers and producers, the teenage experience is assimilated into mainstream culture by a media industry that can force experience into oblivion through stylized, aesthetic representation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".