“Not necessarily not there”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter places the paintings of Caribbean Canadian artists Dionne Simpson and Denyse Thomasos in dialogue, examining the abstracted landscapes through which they each grapple with ideas of Black life, confinement, and displacement in metropolitan settings. These artists’ works offer opportunities for delving into/out of intangible/untenable realms of Black being in the place currently referred to as Canada. Their paintings seem to be humming with the energy of a landscape which, to borrow from Toni Morrison, “is not necessarily not there.” With this chapter, Joachim ponders what to make of the “dark energy” imbuing Thomasos and Simpson&s;s paintings. Black livingness infuses creative texts such as the ones produced by Thomasos and Simpson with “dark energy,” leaving viewers with the indelible sense of an incomplete and unending gathering of ideas, histories, and experiences which transcend time and space hovering just out of sight. Simpson and Thomasos&s;s use of non-representational mark-making are a mode through which they illustrate and generate dark energy. Their paintings open an in-between (unseen) space within which viewers grapple with the known unknowns and defined undefinable pieces of Black livingness in constructed spaces. These artists’ visual languages might be understood as translations of the enduring presence of dark energy beyond the visible constructed landscapes which are all too often sites of anti-Black violence. Their paintings offer a visualization of spaces within which Blackness exists on a plane where it can neither be contained, erased, located, nor displaced.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.004 |
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".