The Challenge of Cross-Cultural Creativity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Double Desire challenges the tendency of critics to perpetuate an aesthetic apartheid between Indigenous and Western art. The double desire explored in this book is that of the divided but also amplified attractions that occur between cultural traditions in places where both indigenous and colonial legacies are strong. The result, it is argued, produces imaginative transcultural practices that resist the assimilation or acculturation of Indigenous perspectives into the dominant Western mode and open contemporary art beyond its conventional limited Western trajectory. The essays, by fourteen experts in the field, discuss Indigenous contemporary art practices and their artworld reception in different locales in Australia, America and Africa, from metropolitan centres to regional and remote communities. Postcolonial theories of transculturation, globalism and relational art practices that galvanize current theories of contemporary art provide the main frames for this discussion. Ian McLean introduces key terms and tropes in the histories of Indigenous contemporary art. He also contributes two essays that examine indigenousness as a key concept in Western art, and the challenges facing Indigenous contemporary art in mainstream artworld discourses of postcolonialism, globalism and diaspora. Double Desire's remaining thirteen chapters are divided into three sections, each containing chapters that focus on specific case studies. "Relational Agencies" examines four different types of exchanges between Indigenous and Western ways of thinking, through collaborations between Indigenous artists and non-Indigenous artists, art managers and anthropologists. "Postcolonial Histories" consists of five case studies of individual Indigenous artists who have directly engaged with Western art traditions and colonial histories in transcultural ways that develop an Indigenous contemporaneity, either from within the institutions of the Western artworld or on its margins. "Artworlds" investigates the recent artworld reception of Indigenous contemporary art across three continents by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous critics and curators.
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 | 0.034 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".