MAPS OUT OF PLACE: DISPLACING CARTOGRAPHY IN THE REALM OF CONTEMPORARY ART
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Brian Harley wrote: “maps are too important to be left to cartographers alone” (2001: 239). Not for nothing maps have played a pivotal role as weapons of imperialism, as discursive formations disciplining the link between academic practice and political power and acting as social hieroglyphics in the words of Marx. The aim of this paper is plotting a course towards a divergent use of map-making as creative process and as a set of tactics to destabilize, challenge and re-imagine geographical mapping practices, moving beyond\behind their direct link with power, war and the male Western “episteme”. What is at stake in this provisional critical route is to understand what function and dysfunction, epistemological possibilities or aporias can affect the “modern cartographic ideal” when we displace maps in the world of contemporary art. For instance, looking at those works where the geometry of power is revealed, the bodies strike back, geopolitics and intimate spaces act as a singularity and maps eventually crumble. The value of “deterritorialised epistemologies” (Rogoff 2001) is the chance, sometimes risky, to grasp those alternative representational practices that can emerge through the strategic opening of boundaries of different disciplines. After all, as Edward Said (2000) reminds us, “being out of place” - in this circumstance on the blurred border or in-between different fields of knowledge - can be an ideal condition to deconstruct, blemish and rebuild languages and practices of research.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.081 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".