DANCE IN THE ART GALLERY OF ONTARIO 1977 AND 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) is renowned as a pre-eminent visual arts museum in Canada, it has also featured dance performances since the late 1970s. Historically, a first wave of dance in art museums took place in the 1920s when choreographers, in dialogue with artists, formulated a new vision for dance that broke from the standards of classical ballet. A second wave occurred in the 1960s–70s when sweeping and radical changes in society propelled experimental dance into alternative venues such as museums. A third wave, beginning in the 1990s, brought dance into museum spaces and stemmed from the perspective of institutional critique. This thesis examines two dance performances held at the AGO, exemplifying the second and third waves: Missing Associates’ Solo Improvisation (1977) and Tanya Lukin Linklater’s Sun Force (2017). I will draw on the literature and files at the AGO to analyze the institutional philosophies and exhibitionary practices that led to incorporating dance in these time periods. My core research shows how dance in museums evolved beyond an entertainment function of enhancing the visitor experience to playing a key role in an ongoing critique of the museum. Dance in the museum also expands curatorial practice beyond the visual sense; the movements of bodies transgresses the implicit hierarchies that have restricted both the display of objects and the activities of subjects. I argue that dance creates a more liberated museum experience and a deeper understanding of the visitor’s relationship to art and society. Incorporating dance offers an opportunity to reshape the institutional structure from within and provides a means for the art museum to re-vitalize its connection to the community it represents and serves.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".