Making the Pluriverse Visible: World-Making on the Saugeen (Bruce) Peninsula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation argues that visual artists who live and work on the Saugeen (Bruce) Peninsula, in Ontario, Canada, are co-creating artworks with non-humans, which is evidence of more-than-human world-making. Such co-creative experiences are the result of, and catalysts for the kinds of enchantment our human worlds need to form meaningful and holistic connections with non-humans, effectively creating a more inclusive pluriverse. After reviewing interdisciplinary literature in posthuman studies, creative geography, arts-based practices, environmental humanities, Indigenous knowledges, and political ontology, I designed my research to include a combination of qualitative methodologies and methods, including autoethnography and research-creation, to investigate fourteen visual artists, plus myself, as a culture sharing group. Evidence was collected through semi-structured interviews, studio visits, visual analyses of artworks, and reflections on my own artistic practice and experimental research methods with dolostone in St. Jean Point Nature Preserve on the peninsula. Using the pluriverse as a critical framework of entanglement and heterogeneous worlding practices inclusive of humans and non-humans, I sought answers to my research questions. I found that contemporary visual culture on the peninsula is not strictly a human construct, but it is a form of co-creation, an artistic materialization of a relationship between a human and non-human. In the acts of co-creation with non-humans, the artists and I experienced forms of enchantment. Viewers of the finished artworks experience enchantment too, which could become a means to a renewed worldview that embraces the wellbeing of non-humans over human exceptionalism. My own autoethnographic reflections and research-creation practice validated these findings, bringing visual form to the geopolitical concept of the pluriverse, which I presented as an exhibition in July 2023. This contribution to Canadian creative geography includes all of the findings, including autoethnographic findings and the research-creation experience, to a tell a new story about the Saugeen (Bruce) Peninsula.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".