Bibliographic record
Abstract
This text explores the transformative relationships connecting F riederike Mayröcker’s writing, personal papers, and institutionalized fonds. It presents an interpretive case study in three parts: first, by establishing a critical context; second, by examining her own writing, interviews, and documentary footage on personal archiving; and third, by analyzing her archive on the Austrian National Library’s web portal. I interpret these activities using literature that challenges notions of individual authorship, reveal material networks and forces in textual production, and argue for collective and social models of archival arrangement. I warrant that these zones evince a shared activity which I introduce as the concept of archival-poiesis, a distinct process that constellates ongoing relations with the radical contingency of the ordinary. The resultant fonds is a text which does not represent a life as much as offer a trace of living. By emphasizing ongoing activity, attunement to the poiesis of the archival task invites meditation on the paradoxical iterative project of self fashioning, and being fashioned by the world around you, through discrete choices. By this, I mean we can begin to see living as a material project, an art in continual circuit navigating a journey from an unchosen starting place toward an unknown destination. Mayröcker’s project insists that we are missing out in searching for internal meaning alone. Her archival-poiesis, a singular case of a much larger spectrum of related techniques, draws attention to the expressive sensibility of exteriority as a territory for the potentiation of difference.
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 | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.092 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".