Individual Vulnerability and Collective Resistance Under Surveillance: Claiming the Right to Existence against Discriminatory Suspicion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hasan Elahi’s Tracking Transience (2003–2020) was an artistic performance of hypervisibility. Initiated in response to being misidentified as a terrorist, preemptively arrested, and interrogated by the FBI, the artist created a comprehensive life log documenting his everyday life for all to see. Despite transformations to the surveillance environment, the performance raised a question that remains relevant today: How can ubiquitous surveillance be resisted when the technologies of capture and control are pervasive, but being visible is normalized? I argue that through his performance of countervisual aesthetics, Elahi claimed the right to existence and reassessed the need for the collective refusal of surveillance. I make two contributions to the theorization of aesthetic resistance. First, against the tendency to romanticize resistance, I reaffirm the impossibility of evasion. Surveillance is ubiquitous in the current datafied society, and being under surveillance generates vulnerability. Yet it is from this located, contingent position that we need to theorize resistance. Second, by theorizing how aesthetic performance mobilizes its public, I demonstrate that resistance to surveillance needs to move beyond the individualism of privacy. Through rereading Tracking Transience, I show how visibility enables collective resistance to the normalization of surveillance control and hierarchies.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".