“Festivalizing” Performance: Community and Aesthetics through the Lens of Three Festival Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the history of Canadian theatre has been greatly shaped by the existence of the long-established Stratford and Shaw Festivals, a new creative energy is coming from a crop of alternatives to them. These newer festivals are an increasingly important part of the Canadian performance landscape, in part precipitated by a renaissance in performance-creation work by independent artists and performance collectives who eschew the “season and theatre building” model of performance. Instead, these creators favour fluid creation methodologies and presentation arrangements that are well suited to the fluidity of a new festival model of presentation. Over the past decade, a whole network of festivals has been set up across the country to embrace such work, anchored by now venerable festivals such as One Yellow Rabbit’s twenty-three-year-old High Performance Rodeo. Some of these festivals are high profile; Vancouver’s PuSh Festival and the National Arts Centre’s Magnetic North Festival have provided important national stages for new work. Others, like Calgary’s Mutton Busting Festival and Toronto’s RED Festival, happen on a smaller scale and in local settings. Although these smaller festivals tend to be more temporary in nature (both the festivals just mentioned are now defunct), they provide necessary opportunities for new and adventurous work to be developed and seen.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".