{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022015823873409012, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027519779841761265, 'mean_word_length': 5.419426048565121, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Talking Art: The Culture of Practice and the Practice of Culture in MFA Education

South, where the Foundation sought to implement its commitment to economic and social progress via technological innovation, which Fejerskov shows has problematic implications for the simultaneous pursuit of democracy. Chapter Seven traces out how the Gates Foundation’s employment of a chain of organizations, including local NGOs, to facilitate women’s ownership of land in India subjected the project to translation and renegotiation. Chapter Eight shows how the Gates Foundation, despite its stated commitment to private solutions to development issues, has instead employed fluid and hybrid modalities and forms of authority. This is a highly engaging and well-written book that deftly moves between theory and data. Its strengths are multiple, including providing the first full history of the Gates Foundation in a clear and accessible manner. From the perspective of studies of global development, the book’s innovative contribution is to show not how the Gates Foundation influenced the field, as is typical in extant scholarship, but rather to show how such a powerful organization with a new and transformative vision for global development was reshaped in its goal and methods by its entry into the field. For sociologists, however, the book’s analytical contribution is less novel, given that Fejerskov’s goal is to bring the insights of organizational theory, particularly institutional analysis, to the study of global development. For scholars of philanthropy and/or global development, the book misses the chance to speak directly to current research on and discussion over the effects of philanthrocapitalism for global development. Fejerskov could have woven in a second narrative, alongside the book’s conceptual attention to institutional processes, one that focuses on precisely how the Gates Foundation, despite its size and its embrace of philanthrocapitalism, was changed by its entry into global development. In other words, new charitable entrants to the field of global development may espouse the ‘‘California Consensus,’’ but even the Gates Foundation—the most powerful and single-minded of the lot—has been forced to alter its methods faced with the broader conventions and modalities of global development. It has done so in some ways but not others. Leaving out conceptualization of this point and why it matters is a missed opportunity here—addressing it would have allowed Fejerskov to join in the broader debate about the effects for global development of the rise of charitable foundations, among other public and private actors committed to neoliberalism (see, for example, Roy [2010] and McGoey [2015]). Nonetheless, this book can be highly recommended for providing important insights into the workings of a powerful actor, committed to change, within the arena of global development.