Bibliographic record
Abstract
By way of figuration, implicatedness, and other interdisciplinary concepts, this essay contextualizes and critiques Lincoln Clarkes's acclaimed book of photographs of unnamed women pictured as heroin on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, where many women are missing and murdered. ********** Having one's photograph taken and displayed will not cure a heroin addiction; it does, however, encourage people to remember that are not nameless outcasts, and that we all have a responsibility to recognize their struggle.--Barbara Hodgson, Heroines: Printed on the cover of Heroines: by Lincoln Clarkes is a photograph of a blonde figure leaning in the doorway of a seedy cafe (Illus. 1). Her arms are open, her gaze is upon us, the door is open. Captions come to mind: Welcome to my world, Take me I'm yours, She's asking for it, who can't be raped, Prostitute, Drug Addict. Readers opening the book, passing through her open door, enter the world which Clarkes makes through his photographs of women he pictures as heroines: women heroin who live on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. How does she look to you? In this photograph, and in the other unseen photos referred to in this essay, what culturally meaningful signs is Lincoln Clarkes mobilizing? (Signs: seedy cafe; inviting woman; cardigan pushed off bare shoulders; black bra straps; lace halter top; tie dangling between thighs; bare belly; thin; stoned.) Is it meant to look like she is selling sex to get money for drugs she is addicted to; as if she is implicating herself? She is represented corroborating--sexualized, objectified, com-modified, a spectacle. (The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images [Debord n.p.; emph. mine].) Is she meant to look like she is in survival sex trade work, which means that for her, then, a pimp, a drug habit, or extreme poverty leaves her with no other option (Gardner)? Still, in a shutter's moment, she's set in perpetuity. Fixed. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] In her Foreword, quoted above, Barbara Hodgson encourages people to remember that addicts are not nameless outcasts (xiv). Looking through Heroines for the photographed woman's name, I find a List of Photographs ordered by page number or photograph number, by date and location. She is Cover: July 3, 2001|King's Cafe, 350 Powell Street. None of the book's authors explains why the women photographed are nameless in Heroines. If they requested anonymity, if this is for their protection, why not say so? Why not use assumed names? Of the 112 photographs in Heroines, only three women are named in the essays: who Clarkes says died of a drug overdose (x); Sheila Egan (missing) (Allen 125); and Patricia Johnson (missing and presumed dead, Dietrich-Campbell 111). Robert Willy Pickton has since been charged with the murders of Patricia Johnson and fifteen other women. Five of the women whose remains would ultimately be found on the farm are pictured in Heroines, states Seattle writer Charles Mudede in a tell-all feature article titled Death Farm: The Geography of Pig Farmer Robert Pickton, the Man Suspected of Having Killed Over 60 Vancouver, BC, Sex Workers. Searching for more names of women Clarkes has pictured as heroines, I begin to notice that the women's words are absent too, that there are no statements by the women Lincoln Clarkes has photographed. Women missing names, missing words, missing women on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. The thing she got most from me, next to money and a few tears, was time. And I enjoyed every minute of it.--Clarkes, x In his introductory remarks, titled Leah, Lincoln Clarkes uses this film noir tone to tell us his version of Leah's story. This is how he represents his relation to her: a femme fatale. …
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".