Land-Based Theatre and Performance in Sovereign Artistic Ceremonies of Selected Indigenous Artists from Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article focuses on the problem of Indigenous theatrical sovereignty which is examined on the basis of theater/performance theories and practices by such Aboriginal artists/theorists/performers from Canada as Floyd Favel, Monique Mojica and Kim Senklip Harvey. The theoretical framework of this study focuses on the decolonization and indigenization of theatrical practices, and specifically on theater as artistic ceremony and theater as a research methodology. The selected artists vehemently oppose colonial violence, exploitation and marginalization of Indigenous populations, their lands and cultures. They are interested in the reclamation and revitalization of Indigenous philosophies and traditions via theater/performance. They explore the development of dramatic techniques informed by Indigenous philosophies rooted in the Indigenous holistic concept of the land as sacred, as a living entity, and an archive of stories. They believe in the plural nature of reality, and they honor non-anthropocentric perspectives and relational worldviews. Each of the artists is discussed with reference to theories and methods informed by research into their specific cultures and knowledges, which they reclaim and transform into performance. Favel is discussed as a pioneer of Indigenous dramaturgies whose principles were abstracted from selected elements of his Plains Cree cultural traditions. His “Native Performance Culture” is the first documented theory and method consciously created from Aboriginal heritage. Mojica’s methods are shown as developed from her research into structures and principles abstracted from mola, the textile art of her ancestors, Kuna people, as well as from her embodied research into pre-contact earthworks and mounds. Harvey’s innovative theater methodologies, “Salish Earthing” and “Fire Creation Methodology,” are reflected upon as grounded in her strong relation to the Salish land. The artists challenge the Western theatre conventions, and replace them with sovereign land-based Indigenous theater/performance processes and methodologies, aiming to create the acts of healing, community making, resurgence, survivance, as well as the respect and care for the land and all creation. They offer hope at the time of diverse global environmental, social and cultural crises.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".