Dance as Revolution: Exploring Prisoner Agency Through Arts-based Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carceral spaces such as prisons are designed to restrict freedoms and keep inhabitants confined and under surveillance through various mechanisms. As a result, prisons are spaces where movement is restricted through confinement, while prisoners’ ability to move is conflated with freedom. We aim to move beyond this dichotomy and consider a complex rethinking of the body in criminological theory and practice through dance in carceral space. In doing so, we explore under what conditions movement represents agentic practices. Understanding these nuances requires an interrogation of prisoner agency, including prisoners’ subtle maneuverability of power dynamics within the prison. We explore these dynamics using feminist and arts-based methods, specifically dance workshops delivered to twenty participants incarcerated in a Canadian provincial women’s prison. We find that movement and expression in prison may create moments of agentic freedom for incarcerated women under certain conditions. We argue that more nuanced understandings of incarcerated women’s agency can be found in their daily negotiations of time and space, and movement can provide numerous meanings. Our findings suggest arts-based approaches within prison environments create opportunities for women to express their identity and sexuality through movement in ways otherwise not permitted in prison. For many incarcerated women in this study, this sense of freedom may be associated with the ability to focus and take care of themselves while confined.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".