Changers: A Spiritual Renaissance - Recentering Indigenous Women's Self-Determination, Artistic Sovereignty and Excellence in the 1980s and 1990s.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis builds upon an Indigenous feminist archive by analyzing the exhibition Changers: A Spiritual Renaissance within the social and political art climate of the 1980s and 1990s. Changers is the first contemporary art exhibition in Canada highlighting work by Indigenous women artists from the perspective of an Indigenous woman curator. It was organized by the Indian Art Centre (now the Indigenous Art Centre) in 1989 and curated by Wolastoqey elder, artist, and writer Shirley Bear of Neqotkuk (Tobique First Nation). \nThe systematic disempowerment of Indigenous women provided the grounds for women’s activism, which paved a path for self-determination and amplified women’s political voice beginning with the “Indian Women’s Movement.” Changers represents a specific expression of feminism initiated by Bear’s activism in the 80s and 90s. Her exhibition text an instrumental tool to Indigenous women’s art history, as it addresses colonialist and patriarchal narratives imposed on Indigenous peoples, specifically how these systems impact the women. The exhibition serves as a counter-narrative and strategy to recenter Indigenous women’s art, experience, and excellence. \nBear’s exhibition advanced discussions around visual sovereignty, survival, refusal, decolonial aesthetics, by drawing on feminist scholars such as Jolene Rickard, Sherry Farrell Racette, and Julie Nagam. The exhibition demonstrates Indigenous relational aesthetics – an Indigenous feminist framework from Jas M. Morgan (previously Lindsay Nixon) – that centers relationships and care through kinship networks.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".