Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Classification' keyword pg.1 of 8
11 MARCH 2019

The Wellcome Collection's Interactive Digital Stories

"Digital Stories was developed by Wellcome Collection in 2014 to make the outputs of our ambitious digitisation programme both accessible and meaningful to an audience beyond academic researchers. Each story is arranged in six chapters, following a narrative arc or thematic thread: each chapter takes the form of a long scrolling page containing frames of text, interactives, graphics, and video. Image Galleries and further interactives are accessed by hotspots on the pages. Each image is accompanied by a link to the original source and an option to download."

(Danny Birchall, Anna Faherty, 2016, MW2016: Museums and the Web 2016)

1

TAGS

2014 • Air Loom • all-controlling Air Loom • Anna Faherty • antisemitic stereotype • Anton Mesmer • Ark of curiosities • back and forth in time • cabinet of curiosities • causes of death • chapter metaphor • classificationcollection • Danny Birchall • design for the screen • Digital Stories (2014) • digital story • digital storytellingdigitisation programme • fan mail • fantasy • hypnotism • i-Doc • infinite canvas • interactive digital mediainteractive digital narratives • interactive infographic • interactive information graphicsinteractive information visualisationinteractive multimediainteractive narrativeinteractive storyinteractives • James Tilly Matthews • John Tradescant • Lambeth • Mike Jay • mind control • Mindcraft (digital story) • multimedia interactive • Museums and the Web (conference) • MW2016 • obituary data • online multimediarepositoryscrolling experience • seventeenth century • Sigmund Freud • Sir Henry Wellcome • six individuals • Svengali • The Collectors (digital story) • thematic thread • thirst for knowledge • UKvertical scroll • Wellcome Collection

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
02 SEPTEMBER 2013

The artistic image: 'between the sayable and the visible'

"The sworn enemy of this logic of combination or juxtaposition are the border police of genre classification (typical of art history and its curatorial leanings which seem to contaminate film theory too) who struggle with any notion of redistribution of the sensible. It is in The Future of The Image that Jacques Rancière defines the artistic image as a set of operations or relations 'between the sayable and the visible' and calls this the regime of the 'distribution of the sensible', a status quo which can be altered, through a redistribution, which creates new ways of seeing (Rancière, 2007: 6). In the work of Marker and Godard, such a redistribution of the sensible has been generally understood, categorised as–and duly named–'film–essays', ever since André Bazin coined the phrase, referring specifically to Marker's work as a political and historical type of writing mediated by poetry (Bazin, 1985: 179–181). Fine. But what does the catch–phrase cover? What practice does it immunise? Is there a risk of seriously limiting the scope and aesthetic dimension of such films by segregating them?

Phillip Lopate considers the film–essay a 'cinematic genre that barely exists' in Can Movies Think? In Search of The Centaur: The Essay–Film (Lopate, 1998: 280). It must have words, whether spoken, subtitled, or intertitled. These must represent a single voice and exclude any collage of quoted texts that do not reflect a 'unified perspective'. The film must be an argument, an attempt at working out a problem; it must put across a personal view, and be well–written (Lopate, 1998: 283). However, his classification is quite prescriptive: no interviews are allowed and no documentaries (Lopate, 1998: 305). Yet, Lopate's examples include Resnais's documentary Night and Fog (1955) and his dictate of 'reasoned, essayistic discourse' seems too narrow from the perspective of visual art, and certainly contradicts his celebration of Marker, whose digressive approach to text and image is deliberate in a spiralling multiplicity that brings to mind, for example, Carlo Emilio Gadda's novels which are equally and intentionally digressive and always on the edge of subverting the integrity of the text, or, perhaps closer to home in a French milieu, Georges Perec's roving pen in Species of Spaces and Other Pieces (1997) that picks up from the smallest detail of everyday life a point of departure for a long intellectual journey. In this regard, Italo Calvino's 1985 Harvard lecture on multiplicity, later collected in Six Memos of the next Millenium (1993), provides an excellent cultural context for exploring the method and the creative potential of experimenting beyond the limitations of genre from inside, showing how genre can become a nonsense when its border lines are crossed, because you are invited to look at the real differently; true of these filmmakers, true of Calvino himself, true of the films of Michelangelo Antonioni or of Federico Fellini's too."

(David Brancaleone, 2012, Vertigo Magazine)

Brancaleone, D. (2012). "The Interventions of Jean–Luc Godard and Chris Marker into Contemporary Visual Art". Vertigo Magazine. Spring 2012.

TAGS

Andre Bazinart history • artistic image • border crossings • border/boundaryborderline • Carlo Emilio Gadda • Chris MarkerChristian Boltanski • cinematic genre • classificationcontemporary artcontemporary visual artcuratorial practice • digression • digressive approach • distribution of the sensible • essayistic discourse • experimental cinemaFederico Fellinifilm essayfilm theory • genre classification • genre differentiation • Georges Perec • integrity of the text • interventionist artJacques RanciereJean-Luc GodardjuxtapositionMichelangelo AntonioniMnemosyne Atlasmulti-media collagistmultiplicitiesmultiplicity • new ways of seeing • Night and Fog (1955) • Okwui Enwezor • Phillip Lopate • problem centric approach • redistribution • redistribution of the sensible • sayable • sensible • set of operations • set of relations • Six Memos of the next Millenium (1993) • Species of Spaces and Other Pieces (1997) • text and image • unified perspective • Vertigo (magazine) • video artist

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
04 MAY 2013

Consultation to reclassify and measure the UK Creative Industries

"The purpose of this consultation is to update the DCMS Creative Industries classification and we are inviting input from interested parties. We have been engaging with industry and partner organisations over potential changes via a Technical Working Group of the Creative Industries Council and are now at a point where we would like to go out to consultation and seek wider views.

We have been working with partners (NESTA, Creative Skillset and Creative and Cultural Skills), to review and update the classification used in the DCMS Creative Industries Economic Estimates (CIEE). We intend to use this review 'Classifying and Measuring the Creative Industries', referenced below, as an objective starting point to suggest which occupations and industries should be included in the updated DCMS classification.

The review uses the idea of 'creative intensity' (the proportion of people doing creative jobs within each industry) to suggest which industries should be included. If the proportion of people doing creative jobs in a particular industry is substantial, above a 30% threshold, the industries are candidates for inclusion within the Creative Industries classification.

Similar to the outlook in our current Creative Industries Economic Estimates, the 'creative intensity' approach focuses on industries where the creative activity happens. The intention is to produce a classification which provides direct estimates of employment and the contribution to the economy, with no double counting – rather than attempting to capture all activity further down the value chain, for example, retail activities. The classification generated in this way can be used as a starting point for indirect estimates which include wider economic effects along the supply chain.

Any approach has data and methods constraints, which may affect some industries more than others. These limitations are reflected in the consultation and consultees are invited to suggest alternatives, supported by evidence–based argument. Weaknesses in the underlying classifications and data used to construct these estimates, which are identified by users, will be fed–back to the organisations which set these standards and provide these data so that we can influence longer–term improvements."

(Department for Culture, Media & Sport, 19 April 2013)

TAGS

2013 • CIEE • classificationclassification scheme • Classifying and Measuring the Creative Industries • contribution to the economy • creative activity • Creative and Cultural Skills • creative industries • Creative Industries classification • Creative Industries Economic Estimates • creative intensity • creative jobs • creative occupations • Creative Skillset • data constraints • DCMS • DCMS Creative Industries Economic Estimates • Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) • economic effects • estimate • estimation • evidence-based argument • government consultation • longer-term improvements • measurement • methods constraints • NESTAproposals • proposed changes • public consultationreview • SOC • Standard Occupational Classification • supply chain • Technical Working Group of the Creative Industries Council • UKUK Governmentvalue chain

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
10 FEBRUARY 2013

Archaeology is about our relationships with what is left of the past

"Archaeology is what archaeologists do. This answer is not a tautology. It refers us to the practices of archaeology. And to the conditions under which archaeologists work – the institutions and infrastructures, the politics and pragmatics of getting archaeological work done.

Archaeologists work on what is left of the past. Archaeology is about relationships – between past and present, between archaeologist and traces and remains. Archaeology is a set of mediating practices – working on remains to translate, to turn them into something sensible – inventory, account, narrative, explanation, whatever.

Archaeology is a way of acting and thinking – about what is left of the past, about the temporality of remainder, about material and temporal processes to which people and their goods are subject, about the processes of order and entropy, of making, consuming and discarding at the heart of human experience.

'Archaeological Sensibility' and 'Archaeological Imagination' are terms to summarize components of these mediating and transformative practices. Sensibility refers us to the perceptual components of how we engage with the remains of the past. Imagination refers us to the creative component – to the transforming work that is done on what is left over."

(Michael Shanks)

TAGS

archaeological imagination • archaeological sensibility • archaeologist • archaeologybetween past and presentclassificationconsumingconsumptioncultural significance of objects • discarding • entropyephemerahuman experienceinterpretationinventorymakingmaterial processesmaterial worldmaterialitymediating practices • Michael Shanks • orderremainder • remains • remains of the pastsymbolic meaning • tautology • temporal processes • temporality • the discipline of things • theory buildingthingstraces • transformative practices • useful significancewhat is left of the past • what is left over

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
05 JUNE 2011

The UK Joint Academic Coding System (JACS)

"The Joint Academic Coding System (JACS) is owned and maintained by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) and the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) and is used for subject coding of provision across higher education in the UK. JACS was first introduced in 2002/03 (UCAS year of entry 2002 and reporting year 2002/03 HESA) to replace the two different classifications systems previously used by the two organisations. JACS is currently used to code the subjects of both higher education courses and the individual modules within them across the full range of higher education provision.

Since the range and depth of subjects available for study in higher education is not static, it is necessary to review JACS on a regular basis to ensure that it is current and up to date. A first review of a subset of subject areas resulted in JACS 2.0 introduced for 2007 year of entry (UCAS) and 2007/08 reporting year (HESA).

A second review of JACS has just been completed, leading to the production of JACS 3.0 for use from 2012/13 (UCAS year of entry 2012). The intention of this review was to understand any new developments in the identified areas that may not have been reflected in the JACS 2.0 classification and/or to identify anything that was otherwise missing or incorrectly classified.

A number of subject areas were identified as needing review. It was also intended that particular attention be paid to ensuring that JACS was suitable for coding foundation degree provision. Investigation was also undertaken as part of this review to see whether or not JACS could also be used for classification of research."

(Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, UK)

1). Owen Stephens JISC MOSAIC JACS extraction utility: W614, 2011

TAGS

200220032007200820122013classification • classifications systems • code • foundation degree • HESAhigher educationHigher Education Statistics AgencyJACS • JACS 2.0 • JACS 3 • JACS 3.0 • Joint Academic Coding Systemprogramme modules • subject areas • subject coding • taxonomyUCASUKUniversities and Colleges Admissions Service

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.