A Review of Two Conferences: The Head and the Heart of Arts in Prisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a comparative review of two conferences held in North America in March of 2018. Carceral Cultures was presented by the Canadian Association of Cultural Studies at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, from March 1-4. The purpose of the conference was to bring together cultural theorists, practitioners and activists to contemplate the carceral. The Shakespeare in Prisons Conference was presented by the Shakespeare in Prisons Network at the Old Globe Theatre in San Diego, from March 22-25. The focus of this conference was to bring together artists and theorists who work in the field of arts in corrections, not limited to the works of the Bard. As a sometime practitioner-researcher of Prison Theatre I have found it interesting to compare the two conferences in terms of how each appealed to my head (cognition), and to my heart (affect), in engaging with the politics and aesthetics of arts in prisons. The conferences were divergent in so many ways, and yet now converge in my mind to deepen my understanding of the work that I do, and strengthen my resolve to continue resisting the broken (in)justice system through art-research-activism.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".