Centering Intersectional Empathy in Theatre Creation: Directing as a Dramaturgy of Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian theatre was founded on imperial and Eurocentric values that contribute to the presence of harm, exclusion, and inequity in its creation practices. This thesis reflects the journey of a settler theatre artist dispelling the nature of their cultural conditioning to embrace an anti-imperial worldview that centers intersectional empathy. I present the theory and research behind the development of the Process-As-Relation paradigm, which reflects the practices of intersectionality, anti-oppression, and heterarchical power distribution and ethically considers alternate ways of knowing through the ethnographic research of Indigenous peoples’ cultural perspectives and artistic practice in the theatrical medium. I then chart the application of the Process-As-Relation paradigm to the creative process for a production of Crave by Sarah Kane, presenting insight into practical usage and empirical data on efficacy. While Process-As-Relation was generated to shift my own artistic ontology – how I embody my worldview in artistic practice – it is a system of thought that can aid other theatre artists in addressing their own relationship to imperial thinking in their artistic praxis. This research demonstrates that by incorporating the Process-As-Relation paradigm in curating the artistic process as well as anchoring individual artistic practice, theatre makers can embrace relational thinking that prioritizes wholism and the nourishment of both the individual and the collective.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| 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".