Crip curation and the aesthetics of the undeliverable
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the author argues how the conceptual curatorial work of Lucy Lippard imbued similar qualities to those that are embodied in the curatorial work of the ‘aesthetics of the undeliverable’. The aesthetics of the undeliverable is a new genre of disability curating that centers the realities of disability and access within curatorial and artistic practice, alongside exhibition design. The line that runs through both styles of curatorial practice, that is, Lippard’s work, and the aesthetics of the undeliverable, is political intent, where the behind-the-scenes labor of the curator is revealed. Specifically, in Lippard’s projects, errors, gaps, and professional time-frames were revealed, whilst the aesthetics of the undeliverable points out inequities towards disabled artists and audiences, yet insisting on time-lines that defy normative frameworks. The author examines these generative comparisons through Lippard’s ‘numbers’ exhibitions curated in the 1960s–1970s, alongside a case study of the exhibition, Undeliverable, curated by artist Carmen Papalia, which was held at Tangled Art + Disability Gallery in Toronto, followed by the Robert McLaughlin Gallery in Oshawa, Ontario in 2021. In doing this, she aims to show how the aesthetics of the undeliverable is a form of institutional critique within disability arts and culture that has its roots in the proponents of conceptual art of the 1960s and Lippard, to which crip curating is aligned through its oppositional handling of curatorial norms. This dovetails powerfully with a call by Disability Studies scholars to move towards crip methodology, and this article will show how crip curation and the aesthetics of the undeliverable heeds this call.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it