Engendering a Counter-Tradition: Jeff Wall, Photo-conceptualism, and the Sexual Politics of the Defeatured Landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation analyses the work of photographer Jeff Wall between the years of 1970 and 1979 in order to argue that the counter tradition he helped develop with other photo-conceptual artists in the Canadian city of Vancouver has included a gendered bifurcation of space since its earliest incarnation in 1970 as the"defeatured landscape." By analyzing the existence of eroticized images of women within the defeatured landscapes of Wall and his peers, the Vancouver counter-tradition of large-scale photography is shown to depend in part on the old modern trope of woman-as-nature. Rather than simply considering space as a particular place, space is considered here an active field that includes the control of art-historical discourse, and the conscious opposition towards the historical position once held in the Vancouver art community by an older generation of landscape artists, most notably Emily Carr. Furthermore, I show that during this time frame (1970-1979) the control of art-historical discourse involved adapting to and negotiating new constraints placed on figurative art by a burgeoning feminist consciousness. This study shows that the negotiation of gender relations appears as an important, but hitherto unexamined factor to be considered in the photo-conceptual artists successful bid for the vanguard in Vancouver during the decade of the 1970s.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".