From the forest to the museum: Notes on the artistic and spiritual collaboration between Ernesto Neto and the Huni Kuin people 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, installations of the Brazilian artist Ernesto Neto, with different degrees of Indian participation, have been presented in art museums in Bilbao, São Paulo, and Vienna. The beautiful tissue installations achieved part of their force from their references to ayahuasca healing by the Huni Kuin (Kaxinawa) people of the State of Acre in Brazil. It is interesting to note the convergence between the arrival of Indians to the ayahuasca urban circuit and the acquisition of space for Indian works in the arts system. Up until 2000 in Brazil, the consumption of the beverage was promoted mainly by Christian religions. From then on, Indian groups themselves began to organize experiences with ayahuasca attended by middle-class urban people. They also promoted visits to Indian villages in the Amazon. The insertion of Indian artists into contemporary art spaces started only a few years ago in Brazil, although it had already been happening in Australia, Canada, and in the United States since the 90’s. The circulation of new forms of shamanism, of ayahuasca consumption, and of artistic objects and performances in national and international urban networks shows the great vigor and adaptability of Indian cultural practices. They represent rich, new possibilities for intercultural dialogue; at the same time, both moves raise delicate issues. First, the consumption of ayahuasca in Brazil is limited only to certain situations; abroad, frequently, it is forbidden. Second, in the case of artistic installations/performances, one can anticipate arguments about how collective intellectual property will be regarded and what are the risks of stereotyping alterity. This chapter will examine the works by Neto in collaboration with the Huni Kuin in order to offer preliminary reflections on these questions and others about authenticity, cultural appropriation, and commoditization.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.044 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".