Long Views and Acts of Translation: Finding Usable Pasts for Sustainable Fashion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In October 2023, cultural historian Annebella Pollen met with Amy Twigger Holroyd, fashion designer, maker, researcher and writer, to discuss their shared interests in sustainable fashion strategies, and specifically to consider how the past might be used as a resource for addressing present-day problems. The conversation was prompted by two of Amy’s recent projects. The first, Fashion Fictions—established in 2020 and an ongoing experiment—invites participants to generate and experience fictional visions of alternative fashion cultures and systems. It does this through a three-stage process, beginning with the composition of a short speculative flash fiction that imagines a parallel world with sustainable and satisfying fashion cultures and systems. The next stage adds detail to the initial speculation and manifests it in a visual or material prototype; the final stage moves further towards a fleshed-out world via embodied enactment. The second of Amy’s projects that provided a prompt for the discussion is her 2023 edition of the Bloomsbury Academic book, Historical Perspectives on Sustainable Fashion, co-authored with Jennifer Farley Gordon and Colleen Hill.
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 | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".