Bibliographic record
Abstract
“suicide* notes” lingers in a break that often feels left behind: a psychoanalytic break that appears across the works of those cited herein. Whether Charles Mingus, Fred Moten, Jared Sexton, Hortense Spillers, Claudia Tate or Frank Wilderson III, when one studies their works on the limits of psychoanalysis, particularly its assumed-to-be universal fields of speech and subjectivity, one finds a sort of Freudian navel, a point at which their analyses meets a resistance that appears to foreclose proceeding any further. This navel becomes one of the foci for “suicide* notes” because it echoes and plays off such assumptions about the universality of speech and subjectivity in political organizing. What seems to trouble these authors, in spite of their analytical differences, is what follows for those who fall out of the assumed universal of speech and subjectivity, who are bound to a field of non-meaning, a field of slaughter, a space in which speech and subjectivity never are, are dead without ever coming to life, if either death or life retain any meaning in this field. Borrowing on the origins of Freudian psychoanalysis as a break that followed from resistances to prior methods, “suicide* notes” begins with the twinned navels of psychoanalysis and political organizing, which constitute a navel of afropessimism, to think through what might become of taking this navel of afropessimism not as an end that all readings of (anti-)blackness lead to, but an opening through which one might develop another form of psychic treatment up to the task of black liberation on a global scale. In other words, taking psychoanalysis as not up to task, the aim is to seek a psychic treatment that is capable of freeing black psyches from desiring politics, no matter their material realities, that are bound to a world in which black liberation cannot be.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.240 | 0.218 |
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".