Sculpted in time : heterotopic space in Andrei Tarkovsky's Solaris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his paper "Of Other Spaces" Foucault states that within each society there exist ',real and effective spaces which are outlined in the very institution of society, but which constitute a sort of counter-arrangement, an effectively realized utopia, in which all the real anangements, all the other real arrangements that can be found within society, are at one and the same time represented, challenged and overturned: a sorl of place that lies outside all places and yet is actually localizable (Foucault 1986 p.24)".These spaces are what Foucault has called 'the Heterotopia'a unique gap in the discursive plane in where the individual is afforded the opportunity to observe the elements which are active in the discourses which shape his/her life as an individual subject.Gilles Deleuze's notion of the 'Time-Image' embodies what he describes as a "cinematic philosophy" in which the medium of cinema presents the viewer with new methods of looking at the world around us.A significant element in Deleuze's concept is the role of the "the seer" or the "observer" within the film, a departure from the role of"the actor".Andre Tarkovsky's 1972 {rlm Solaris,, based on a novel by Stanislav Lem, features an excellent example of how heterotopic spaces can in exist in cinematic terms.In order for our individuality to flourish, individual consciousness depends on our ability to reject many of the discursive premises we are subjected to.Tarkovsky's film explores how the experiences gained within heterotopic space provide the individual with the ability to invert the panoptic gaze, and how these experiences can ultimately show us how we might reclaim, or restore, our existence as individual subjectsTable of Contents Preface.,
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".