MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381093494 · doi:10.32920/ifmj.v3i2.1776

Collaboratively Reimagining Spaces Through Socially-Engaged Creative Practices

2023· article· en· W4381093494 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Film and Media Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyExhibitionMedia studiesThe artsPublic relationsGender studiesVisual artsPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In November-December 2022, Khoj, a not-for-profit contemporary arts organization based in New Delhi, India, presented a bilingual exhibition (Hindi and English), “Threading the Horizon: Propositions on Worldmaking through Socially Engaged Art Practice”. The stimulus for this paper comes from the encounter with the fourteen research-driven, community-based projects curated at the gallery. In particular, I explore ‘the how and why’ of five artists/activists and their three projects – how they intervene in the everyday experience of negotiating violence through invisibilities, rights, inequality, and leisure by women and gendered others in the capital city, how the projects in the gallery act as sites of conversation and reflection, and why is it significant to delve into the everyday urban and digital context in which these projects unfold. The artists’/activists’ site-specific placemaking interventions are characterized by transformative processes that emerge from their close, long-term engagement, dialogue, and collaboration with participating communities and other artists/curators/designers. The first project is 5 Bigha Zameen (1 Acre Land) by the architect and artist/activist Swati Janu in collaboration with the Social Design Collaborative. The year-long project, based in Yamuna Khadar, Delhi, sought to actively support the women farmers’ rights to lives and livelihoods on the floodplains of the Yamuna River. Fursat ki Fizayen (Spaces for Leisure) by the spatial design practitioners Divya Chopra and Rwitee Mandal emerged from the leisure experience of women in Madanpur Khadar, an urban village in South Delhi. Rarely seen occupying public spaces for leisure, women reclaimed a small terrace to sit and have tea together – women whose lives were occupied mainly by household responsibilities and work outside. The third community-based project is Aao, Jagah Banaye! (Come, Let’s Make Space!) by the co-founders of City Sabha, Saleha Sapra and Riddhi T. Batra. It sought to empower informal women vendor groups in Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi, facing spatial injustice in an everyday context riddled with deeply-entrenched patriarchy. Drawing on de Certeau’s understanding of “the procedures of everyday creativity” and a Lefebvrian framework to look at spaces, the qualitative study examines women’s (artists/activists’ and the communities’) endeavours to (i) resiliently (re)imagine Delhi as an urban setting; (ii) (re)claim public spaces for leisure, and (iii) (re)configure real and online spaces (on Instagram) through the entanglements of socially engaged creative practices with quotidian experiences. The paper emphasizes the complex power relations between the artists/activists and their communities/collaborators, the bonds of care and compassion formed in and through the projects, and how they can carry forward during the various production, curation and exhibition processes. It raises the following questions: (i) How can tracing the artists/activists’ entangled praxis with diverse everyday environments and the alternative production of urban/rural, physical/online spaces and imaginaries help us expand our understanding of socially engaged creative practices? (ii) How may the artists/activists pay attention to their human collaborators and the non-human environment to create more inclusive projects, develop nuanced ways to strengthen their voices, and share their collective ideas and experiences?

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.640
GPT teacher head0.655
Teacher spread0.014 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it