Unsettling Imaginaries: The Decolonial Diaspora Aesthetics of Four Contemporary Filipinx Visual Artists in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the dominant Canadian imaginary, Filipinx subjects are largely seen as serving the neoliberal priorities of the nation’s economy, which figure the Filipinx as always on the periphery of full national belonging. As a counternarrative, this study examines the practices and oral histories of four Filipinx artists in Canada: Leslie Supnet, Marigold Santos, Julius Poncelet Manapul, and Kuh Del Rosario. To understand the ways in which these racialized and diasporic artists respond to nonbelonging, the researcher utilizes contextual analysis that weaves together interpretations of the artists’ work and their oral histories, which are read through the lens of contemporary art criticism and cultural studies. Key findings reveal that these artists activate their discontent in productive ways that disrupt normative notions of whiteness, sexuality, gender, nuclear family, and nationalisms. Their subject positions are in excess to the dominant stereotypes that persist in the midst of racist and colonial discourses enmeshed in the political, social, and cultural dimensions of Canadian society. Further, this study suggests that Filipinx artists in Canada are complicating visibility politics by adopting non-objective and feminist self- representations. Taken together, this research evidences what the author calls a “decolonial diaspora aesthetic.” Ultimately, they are unsettling dominant conceptions of Filipinx-ness that work to manage difference within the nation’s white settler colonial dominance. The study capaciously draws implications for pedagogy, as this project offers new imaginaries that take into account race, diaspora, and difference in ethical ways that promote antiracism and decolonial relations in 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".