Fine lines: The subtleties of cultural translation and the Yishu: Journal of Contemporary Chinese Art
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Founded in 2002 and edited in Vancouver, British Columbia, the Yishu: Journal of Contemporary Chinese Art is the first English-language journal devoted solely to the discussion of Chinese contemporary art and culture. This thesis argues that Yishu's development as a publication, as well as recurrent strains of discourse throughout Yishu, concern the issue of cultural translation. Chinese contemporary artists and scholars must navigate the tensions of cross-cultural exchange in their work due to the influence of Western critical theory in Chinese contemporary art discourse, an unequal cultural dynamic within global scholarship which prioritizes the English language, and the Western-dominated international art world. The analysis of Yishu's transcribed dialogues on the topic of Chinese art criticism, articles concerning the work of prolific Chinese artist Xu Bing, and documentation of the Long March Project, reveals that artists and scholars of contemporary Chinese art negotiate the binaries between Chinese and English, East and West, resistance and accommodation, universality and particularity, in order to locate a discursive space of cultural exchange that resists arbitrary categorization based on geopolitical boundaries and cultural imperialism.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".