The imaging of the city: The production of subjectivity within the dazzlement of the affective networked city
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research conceptualises the networked city as a machinic screen. The affective forces of technology upon the city-as-screen is framed by a Deleuzian methodology, where affect theory is central. Research focuses on the Thatcherite imaginary connected to East London and then to discussion of other contemporary cities. This research claims that the increased technological networking of the ‘smart’ city to light-emitting diodes (L.E.D.s) creates increased screen-like luminescence that plays a key role in sense-making experience, but importantly, also in the imaging of the city within a neo-liberal imaginary. Steven Shaviro’s concept of ‘post-cinematic affect’ is applied to the reading of the city as an affect-laden spectacle. Research is conducted into the visuality of the city within modernity, using the symbol of the skyscraper as a thread to connect the Empire State Building, One Canada Square, and the Burj Khalifa. There is an exploration of the relationship between the imaginaries of the city and the modulation of the subject within it. Hocquenghem’s queer affect theory is used to examine queer representations of the city and as a method for remediating the spectacle of the city. This process involves mapping the affects encountered in East London to examine the dazzlement of the networked city. This affective mapping is used to develop a creative practice that aims to resignify the neo-liberal spectacle through a queer narrative. This form of ‘détournement’ of the city is also explored in examples of cinema and art where it operates as a form of resistant agency.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".