Turning Toward Exhibition Environments in 1990s Installation Art: The Installation Spaces of Janet Cardiff and George Bures Miller
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1990s witnessed the rise of exhibition environments in installation art, as artists and curators challenged established notions of art display. This paper analyzes the sound and multimedia installations To Touch (1993) and The Dark Pool (1995) by Canadian artists Janet Cardiff and George Bures Miller. A close examination of the conditions of production and reception reveals Cardiff and Miller's focus on space and their integration of experimental media. I argue that Cardiff and Miller's method of spatialization – encompassing both physical and conceptual concerns – developed in tandem with their embrace of experimental new media. This perspective diverges from typical interpretations focusing solely on interactivity and narrative. In To Touch, Cardiff imported methods of music composition and spatial distribution of sound to work with narrative structure spatially. The Dark Pool merged Cardiff’s interest in spatial sound and narrative with Miller’s spatial bricolage, creating immersive, labyrinthine spaces crammed with found objects, kinetics, DIY assemblages and sound. Ultimately, this analysis underscores the pivotal role of sound spatialization and audio technologies and new media within contemporary art, offering a renewed understanding of 1990s installation art's emphasis on spatial formation and its broader experimental ethos.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it