Transpersonal Art: A Conversation with Artist Judy Schavrien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents an excerpt from an interview with Judy Schavrien, a transpersonal psychology scholar, poet, and artist. In the course of this dialogue, Schavrien uncovers the philosophical and psychosocial underpinnings for the artworks included in her books Alice at the Rabbithole Café and Everything Voluptuous: The Love Songs 1970-2014. The collegial conversation, unstructured in advance yet guided by the art it explores, inquires into the following: the role of the transpersonal artist-scholar; the meaning Schavrien attributes to her subject matter; the environments and people that act as catalysts; the relevance of her choice of media and process; and, finally, whether the aims in her art and research converge. It becomes clear that, for Schavrien, it is not enough for artists to be mere custodians of their culture. Their role, in her view, is to challenge conventions, cry out, provoke thought, engage multiple ways of knowing, and offer alternatives that push society forward. Her research intends the same. Both Schavrien and the interviewer perceive a participatory element in her art, her research, and the approach taken in this article that explores them.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".