A “cinema of sovereignty”: working in the cultural interface to create a model for fourth world film pre-production and aesthetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A -Cinema of Sovereignty‖: Working in the Cultural Interface to Create A Model for Fourth World Film Pre-production and Aesthetics This thesis examines the Indigeneity of Indigenous films/videos in an era of globalization.I explain the challenges of an Indigenous filmmaker writing within a Western institution that does not recognize Indigenous systems of knowledge.I take Barry Barclay' theme of -Dance With the Other‖ and use it with Martin Nakata's work on cultural interface and Indigenous standpoint theories to develop an Indigenous methodology for this thesis and for a production framework guided by Barclay's operating principles.Using Canada as my example, I include theoretical frameworks of Indigenous and non-Indigenous theorists for Indigenous production in George Manuel's Fourth World and Barclay's Fourth World Cinema, and Randolph Lewis's -Cinema of Sovereignty.‖I use four models to understand an innovative visually sovereign practice: Indigenous writers' model, Abadian's cultural healing paradigm; Roth's codevelopment model and Mills' model for de-centering Hollywood as center of global cinema.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".