From vagrant scenographies to urban speculative gestures: a feminist turn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What kinds of scenographies emerge when we work through a feminist lens, vis à vis embodied perspectives, with the situated nature of city spaces? In this paper we explore instances and becomings of urban scenography as both embodied and speculative gestures in the city. Inspired by recent writings on contemporary performance design and scenographic practices that ask us to consider how the field has expanded (McKinney and Palmer, 2017) or is moving “beyond scenography” (Hann, 2019), in this performance lecture we situate scenography within notions of the vagrant (Arnold, 2013), speculative gestures and “ecologies of practices” (Stengers), sympoiesis (Haraway), and embodiment (Grosz) to rethink urban processes and the potential role that scenographic knowledge/sensibilities/practices can be methodologically utilized for urban research. Importantly, we are interested in drawing from critical feminist frameworks to explore the potentials of scenographic practices and reflect on the wider politics of spatial agency in the urban realm, and what it means to (un)make and transform space from these perspectives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.078 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".