Beyond Love and Death: Defining Abject Aesthetics in 1980s and 1990s Anglo-Canadian Cinema
Bibliographic record
Abstract
My doctoral thesis examines 1980s and 1990s Anglo-Canadian cinema, and introduces the concept of abject aesthetics to define the particular formal and narrative similarities between features produced in this time. This thesis is informed by the practices and theory of poststructuralism and psychoanalysis, and as the foundation of my thesis I rely on Julia Kristeva’s definition of the abject, as a place that disturbs “borders, systems, rules.” I locate these transgressions within the cinema of filmmakers such as Atom Egoyan, David Cronenberg, Patricia Rozema, Lynne Stopkewich, Guy Maddin, Clement Virgo, Bruce McDonald, and Srinivas Krishna, in which sexuality and death are configured through degrees of neurotic fascination that define the cinema at this time. From this position, I investigate the arrival of the abject as a transgressive aesthetic that re-thinks the concept of the Self, and by extension, renegotiates the myths and ideals of Canadian identity. Abject aesthetics I define through two features: too many/ too few bodies, and the dissolution between reality and fantasy. In expanding on these concepts of abject aesthetics, I combine the works of theorists such as Steven Shaviro, Leo Bersani, Elizabeth Grosz, Kaja Silverman, Laura U. Marks, Tsvetan Todorov, to think through the relationship between the body, the look, the screen, and the imaginary. As such, I demonstrate the ways that Anglo-Canadian cinema in this time period expands upon concepts of gender, sexuality, the materiality of the body, identity, and nationalism, through the themes of love and death. While my work resides in the domain of the 1980s and 1990s, I offer abject aesthetics as an emergent area of critical investigation in Canadian cinema.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".