Crossing over: theorising Mehta’s film trilogy; practising diasporic creativity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project, titled “Crossing Over: Theorising Mehta’s Film Trilogy, Practising Diasporic Creativity” articulates a critical-creative research discourse. It crosses over in terms of\ntraversing critical scholarship on genre and audience, assuming multiplie cultural positions, as well as in bridging the theory/practice divide. The most critical theoretical intervention made by this project is to insist on a more nuanced (rather than homogeneously “transnational”) account of situated diasporic practice.\nThe thesis comprises the critical component, and consists of a preface and five chapters on the theory, location, genre, audience and remixing of diasporic creative practice. In addition to the critical component, the project consists of a 20-minute visual essay and a web-log of production notes that constitute the creative component.\nThe aim of the critical section is to theorise the intertwining of personal, political, and poetic attributes of diasporic creative practice through the conception, development and\ndistribution stages. Such a theorisation demonstrates the situated nature of diasporic production and reception, and its crossover potential is exemplified through the study of\nIndo-Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta and her well known “elements” film trilogy. The critical approach is an epistemological and methodological convergence of the auteur, genre, and audience/cultural studies approaches, and hence a theoretical crossover.\nThe visual essay, titled I Journey Like a Paisley is itself a crossover of various textual genres, as well as creatively manifesting the multiple cultural positions of diasporic practice laid out in the critical component. It documents the lives of a group of young Indian-Australians residing in Adelaide through the personal-political-poetic specificities of my diasporic lens. Production choices and screening responses are discussed briefly at the end of the critical component. For a more comprehensive understanding of the production of the theoretical and visual components and their cross overs, entries from the web-log maintained throughout the project (http://over-exposed-image.blogspot.com) have been included in the appendix. Significantly, the research discourse is established as a remixed, theoretically informed practice that crosses cultural and genre/audience boundaries.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".