Decolonizing Hydrosocial Relations: The River as a Site of Ethical Encounter in Alan Michelson's TwoRow II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With Mohawk artist Alan Michelson’s 2005 video art installation Two Row II as a site of analysis, I interrogate the potential for decolonized relationships between two distinct cultures, interconnected through their relationships to a seemingly shared body of water as it cuts across territories that have been historically and contemporarily contested. Drawing on the concept of the “hydrosocial,” I begin by considering the ethical potential of water, as well as its circumscription under current Canadian land rights policies. I then explore the intersubjective hydrosocial relations that structure community engagement along the Grand River. I ask if focusing on water, its ability to both act, and be acted upon, how it both produces and is produced through social relations, allows for a rethought ethical and political paradigm based in theories of action and responsibility that cross human and non-human divides? How can water work as an ethical framework in ways that decolonize water politics, and illustrate a more nuanced and adequately relational environmental ethic that might shape the manner in which land rights issues unfold and are understood? Ultimately, I look to the potential to cultivate a decolonized ecological sensibility grounded in the ethical and political capacity of water in relation to Indigenous land rights issues within the settler-colonial context of Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".