The Sublime Object of Iconology: Duchampian Appellation as Žižekian Interpellation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay considers the question of "naming" by re-examining the works of the artist Marcel Duchamp on the basis of the conceptual apparatus developed by the Lacanian psychoanalyst and philosopher Slavoj Žižek.For Žižek, naming is understood in terms of its broader social-symbolic texture as a ritualistic, meaning making activity that constitutes the zero level of collectivized belief.The act of appellation is thus seen to function as a strategic operation insofar as it is the fundamental bedrock of ideological interpellation-a performative gesture that situates its bearer as "subject."As I argue, through his use of titles in general and his Fountain-Urinal in particular, Duchamp openly stages this operation within the parameters of the aesthetic field.In doing so, Duchamp's oeuvre might be said to render visible the fundamental co-ordinates of Žižek's theoretical framework while at the same time becoming re-habilitated to its psychoanalytic core.Au travers d'une ré-interrogation de l'œuvre de Marcel Duchamp, cette contribution se propose d'explorer l'acte de nommer d'un point de vue
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".