From Turtle Island to Vistula’s Shores: Indigenous North American and Eastern European Futurisms in Dialogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation imagines the possibilities of Indigenous North American and Eastern European artistic dialogues as a form of solidarity.The artists are examined through four chapters that touch upon themes of reinventing traditional stories and legends (Chapter Two), environmental issues as dystopias (Chapter Three), and futuristic folk practices (Chapter Four, Parts One and Two).Each chapter presents visual artists and filmmakers from different Indigenous and Eastern European communities, paired with activists and theorists that discuss survivance, Sorrowfuturism, Hungarofuturism, Ethnofuturism and Indigenous futures with specific focuses on particular Indigenous nations and their unique perspectives.There are theories unique to each chapter, such as the concept of "care" not just caring for community, but caring for traditions and culture as seen in Chapter Four, Part One.Also, discussions of environmental issues in the anthropocene (Chapter 3) or the introductory chapter showcasing the existing relationships between Indigenous and Eastern European communities.Visualizing culture and traditional stories in the future, through a speculative lens, while also using pop culture characters to address topics around colonialism and imperialism can be found in the second chapter.Finally, folk practices and regalia in speculative worlds and spaces (Chapter Four, Part One) precedes the examination of more radical acts of folk art that confront dangerous ideologies and counter oppressive systems that target Indigenous sovereignty, LGBTQ+ communities and women's rights (Chapter Four, Part Two).
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".