MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2042205006 · doi:10.1353/utq.2007.0145

Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility (review)

2007· article· en· W2042205006 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kersti Krug

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésExhibitionContext (archaeology)SociologyMuseologyPostmodernismTransformative learningMedia studiesAestheticsVisual artsHistoryArt historyArtLiterature

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility Kersti Krug (bio) R.R. Janes and G.T. Conaty, editors. Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility University of Calgary Press. ix, 196. $29.95 Museums contribute to the education of our children and ourselves, to our collective memory, and to the development of our culture. In a compendium of stories edited by two eminently qualified museum colleagues, we see a movement today which promises transformative change in this historic contribution to society. The nine stories in this new book illustrate the recent experiences of museum colleagues, which provide ideas and lessons for museum professionals to advance their own contributions. In their introduction to Looking Reality in the Eye, R.R. Janes and G.T. Conaty provide an informative history of museums, art galleries, and science centres that places the current movement in useful context. Their attack on postmodern relativism reflects their critique of a disinclination among museums to be more socially responsible. It captures the chill that went through the museum community when 'Into the Heart of Africa' and [End Page 313] other exhibitions attempted to deal critically or responsibly with history, culture, and representation, but instead evoked controversy and backlash. The chapters themselves provide telling examples of museums coming out of their safe spaces, pushing socially progressive and relevant agendas that deal with the realities of our time. The case studies provide useful templates and issue challenges for others to follow. Conaty and Carver's case from Calgary's Glenbow Museum balances stories from different perspectives, ideologies, and beliefs, allowing us as visitors to question the complexity of different truths. Their chapter reminds us that doing the right thing is hard and takes time; but it's clearly worth the effort. Joanne di Cosmo, of the Canadian Museum of Nature, begins her chapter with excellent, fundamental questions that we continually need to ask ourselves. It's honest, direct, and clear. Emlyn Koster and Stephen Bauman, at the United States Library Science Center, present the most solid description of this museum movement as, essentially, social marketing: it's about making change. Janet Pieschel of the Calgary Police Service Interpretive Centre shows how even private corporations will become aligned with museums doing socially and environmentally sustainable work. With the exception of the first chapter, which is narrated in the first person singular and describes a complex project apparently devoid of problems or glitches, authors are inclusive, candid, introspective, and instructive in their descriptions of collegial collaboration and project realities. Given that each of these chapters stands alone with no continuity or structural context to the compendium, and assuming that most readers will not pore over this book from front to back, organizing the chapters in content categories might have made them easier to access and use. The first chapter, for example, could then have been put in less troublesome context for this reader within a category which reminds us that individual passion and dedication are necessary to drive effective change. Powerful arguments and instructive lessons are presented throughout the book on how museum missions can contribute to a civil society and to sustainable environments and communities. The knowledge that all museums hold in their collections and the expertise of their professional staff can be positively mobilized to identify and illustrate the issues of our communities and our world. More non–North American stories would have been welcome. The sole example, from the Auckland Museum, introduces a valuable new view and reminds us that the borders of North America need not impose limits to what we can learn from one another. The editors should be encouraged to put together another book in a few years to look reality in the eye once again, not only to monitor progress in museums becoming more responsible, responsive, and relevant, but also to build courage for rewriting museum missions and rewarding professional [End Page 314] action that builds civil, sustainable societies. Glenn Sutter and D. Worts, whose excellent chapter shows how responsible social action makes museums themselves more sustainable, should provide a follow-up. Let's keep the momentum going by taking intelligent risks, doing the right thing, making real change...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,035

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,242
Écart entre enseignants0,219 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlyMême sujetMuseums and Cultural HeritageTravaux en français237 207