Icons and Authorship: Photography in Canada in the 1960s / Icônes et vision de l’artiste : La photographie au Canada dans les années 1960
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses Canadian photography in a period often described as the country's "coming of age" and entry onto the world stage.At this time, certain individuals believed in photography's power to unite peoples of diverse backgrounds.Others argued that the medium expressed a universal modernist aesthetic ideal that eschewed nationalist concerns or individual circumstances.Philip Pocock (1925-2015), an avid photographer, critic, curator, and promotor of Canadian photography, attempted to conflate modernist art principles with nationalism.His Expo 67 exhibition, The Camera as Witness, dovetailed nationalist and humanist themes with international trends in photography.He proposed a Canadian Centre for Photography to stimulate the "universal language of photography" with a view to providing an "accurate and enlarged sense of identity among Canadians."Lorraine Monk (1922-2020), executive producer of the Still Photography Division, National Film Board of Canada, also believed that Canadians, regardless of their background, could be united solely through the visual image.However, for James Borcoman (1926-2019), then acting curator, Photographs, National Gallery of Canada, the power of the image had little to do with nationalism.Rather, the art photograph was a selfcontained expression "with its own logic."The National Gallery show Photography in the Twentieth Century proposed to exemplify standards for creative photography.The two concerns of nationalism and high-art modernism merged and separated, ultimately expressing the flexibility of the medium to express a variety of agendas within an increasingly complex artistic milieu that promoted various and sometimes contradictory notions of the artist and artmaking activities.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".