Bibliographic record
Abstract
16mm colour film (17 mins), which explores how our relationship with the dead is made different through film. Produced, directed, written, edited and shot by Pucill. A series of photographic stills from the film has been exhibited and published separately.\nStages of Mourning is Pucill’s journey of bereavement, ritualised through performance to camera. The film is a meditation on coming to terms with loss, exploring how our relationship with the dead is made different through film. The artist orders image fragments of her late lover and collaborator, Sandra Lahire. By trying to physically immerse herself into photographs and film footage or by restaging these, Pucill forms a continuous stream of a life of two lovers. Through this doubling and layering, illusions accumulate as if these were a product of a machine that didn’t stop. The film explores the relationship between the\nhallucinatory power of the phantom of memory and the capacity for lens-based media to carry ghosts. A placing of the lesbian gaze is obsessively sought whilst simultaneously acknowledging the state of a decentred subjectivity. Pucill wrote, directed, shot, edited and produced the film, the process of hands-on authorship of all component parts being central to the artisan language and historical context of her work.\nThe film has been extensively screened, including festivals in Paris, London, Cologne, Kassel, New York; conferences and\ngalleries in USA and London (see portfolio for full list). Five photographs from the film were exhibited and published separately.\nReviews include Naomi Salaman 'Accumulation in Stages of Mourning'; Vicky Smith, 'Stop Frame Motion in Stages of Mourning' (both at Lux-on-line). Pucill has herself written on the film (see output 4). The project won AHRC funding (£13,000). It was acquired for BFI archive; distributed by Lux (on film and sold as DVD), and distributors in Paris, Toronto and USA.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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".