Cinephilia, Publics, Cinegoraphilia: Surveying the Short-Term Effects of Covid-19 on Community-Based Festivals in Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter documents and theorizes community-based film festival programming and organizing tactics during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic between March and September 2020. Drawing from autoethnographic experience and personal conversations with organizers of the Toronto Queer Film Festival (TQFF) and Toronto Outdoor Picture Show (TOPS), I offer the neologism “cinegoraphilia”—a portmanteau of cinephilia and the Ancient Greek agora —to theorize both festival’s strategies to capture the love of watching cinema in public together. As a theory that centers the communal, public features of cinemagoing, cinegoraphilia orients us toward the ways community-based film festivals creatively tried to retain and engage their audiences. I situate TOPS’s and TQFF’s efforts to capture cinegoraphilia within the broader context of public health restrictions in the Canadian province of Ontario, as well as changes to the arts funding ecosystem and funding policy locally in Toronto, provincially in Ontario, and nationally across 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".