Bibliographic record
Abstract
The initial impetus for this special issue came from a conference I co-organised on Music, Politics and the Environment at the University of Technology, Sydney, in April 2013, which coincided with a request from Ross Watkins of Social Alternatives to edit a special issue on Music and Politics. Papers presented at the conference covered topics including music and environmental activism; music and its technological environment; music, acoustic ecology and soundscape studies; the constitution and development of different musical environments; music, landscape, architecture and design; music, memory and place; and music and the political environment. This had in turn been influenced by a conference held by the Canadian branch of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music in Montreal in July 2011, at which I had given a paper on the music of the Australian lyrebird. Although only three papers survive here from the UTS conference, and the rest are from a call for papers sent to the International Association for the Study of Popular Music (IASPM) list, there is an Australian focus in at least two of the papers published here, along with papers focusing on music in Iceland and Canada.Ecomusicology has become a 'buzz' word in popular music studies of late, and in studies of the role of music in environmental activism, along with zoomusicology and soundscape studies. The latter term was of course initiated by Canadian composer and environmentalist R. Murray Schafer as long ago as 1969, in his book The New Soundscape, and despite its appropriation by numerous dubious new age music projects, continues to have considerable traction. Other 'founding fathers' in the field include Francois-Bernard Mâche, a former student of the great French birdsong composer Olivier Messiaen, who coined the term zoomusicology, and the related field of ornitho-musicology, in his book Music, Myth, Nature, first published in French in 1983. Dario Martinelli, the author of the 2009 Of Birds, Whales and Other Musicians - Introduction to Zoomusicology, has done much to advance this field of study. The work of ethnomusicologist Steven Feld, especially his New Guinea-based 1990 Sound and sentiment: birds, weeping, poetics, and song in Kaluli expression, has also been a pioneering voice on music and environmental activism, along with David Rothenberg, the author of Why Birds Sing (2005) and a study of whale song, Thousand Mile Song (2008). The reader will find references to all these authors in the papers that follow.This issue leads off with Carolyn Philpott's study of Australian composer Malcolm Williamson (1931-2003), and his attempts to use his 1982 'transcontinental' Symphony No. 6 as a weapon in the fight to save the Tasmanian Franklin River from being dammed. (Former Australian Greens Party leader Bob Brown also played a key role in this protest movement.) Initially an Australian Broadcasting Commission (as it then was) project involving all six of Australia's capital city orchestras together with a television film featuring Australia's natural environment, the ABC withdrew its involvement after Williamson insisted it express its support for the anti-Franklin dam activists. Philpott examines the historical background of this 'non- event' in the context of Williamson's often controversial musical involvement in social activism. The dam was eventually prevented due to the election of Bob Hawke's Labor government to power in 1983, but Williamson's relations with the ABC were never healed.This is followed by two papers which deal with 'animal music', an often contentious field involving musical interaction between human and non-human agents. In 'Animal Ecologies', Sabine Feisst, an ecomusicologist who has published widely on music and the environment, including an essay about the important US environmentalist composer John Luther Adams, profiles three compositions by New York-based composer Laurie Spiegel involving animals and birds which have become urban 'pests': mice and pigeons. …
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.008 |
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".