“Plastic Arts” or “Visual Arts”? Imaginary de-coincidence and imitation in Polish art discourse after 1989
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the turn of the 1990s, the term "visual arts" gained popularity among the Polish art community and began to replace "plastic arts". However, it seems that this change was not instigated solely by factors related to art, but primarily by political and social ones. The above assumption is prompted by the fact that the expression "plastic arts" may have very broad meaning – in the tradition of Western humanities it referred to both the material as well as intellectual and spiritual dimensions of creative work and may encompass a variety of artistic practices. This is indicated, among other things, by the continuing presence of the phrase "les arts plastiques" in French, where it is commonly used to this day, signifying traditional art media as well as media and art practices used only since the 20th century (e.g. installations or performance). The author of the article argues that the relinquishing of the expression "plastic arts" in the Polish language had an imitative dimension and resulted from the need to demonstrate the fact of belonging to Western culture after the change of the political system in 1989.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".