“As the cracks get wider”: Centre d’art daphne and Decolonizing Practices in Indigenous Artist-Run Centres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis takes Centre d’art daphne as its central case study to examine Indigenous involvement in artist-run centres (ARCs) in Canada. Co-founders Hannah Claus, Caroline Monnet, Nadia Myre, and Skawennati were drawn to the community-oriented nature of ARCs, and wanted to create a space by and for Indigenous artists in Tiohtià:ke/ Mooniyang/ Montréal. As the first Indigenous-led artist-run centre in the city, and the only one in Québec, daphne faces the challenge of adhering to hierarchical organizational structures required of ARCs that conflict with Indigenous governance principles. The co-founders therefore devised a method of governance based in Indigenous values that both subverts and adheres to existing systems, always with the aim to carve out space from a place of both artistic and Indigenous self-determination. \n \nThis thesis draws on Indigenous scholarship on decolonization and Indigenization. In it, I consider the origins and philosophies of ARCs, review the early days of Indigenous artist-run initiatives in Canada, and discuss the long-held desire for an Indigenous-led artist-run centre in Tiohtià:ke. I then analyze how daphne follows an Indigenous governance model centred on values of consensus, self-determination, and collaboration. I discuss the double marginalization of Indigenous artists in Québec and examine the disparity between support for Indigenous arts in comparison to the rest of Canada. Finally, I put daphne in conversation with BUSH Gallery, a BC-based Indigenous arts collective, to explore an alternative to the ARC model in response to the problem of bureaucracy within the network. By looking at the ways that Indigenous artists have been able to seep into the cracks of the ARC system, I argue that daphne ruptures internal boundaries and overcomes colonial impositions and limitations to create space for Indigenous autonomy and self-determination.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".