Putting a Price on Culture: Ethnic Organisations, Volunteers, and the Marketing of Multiculturaly Festivals
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Cynthia Thoroski and Pauline Greenhill(1) University of Winnipeg Introduction: Ethnic Festival Tourism Last October 1998, Canadian Society for Traditional Music held its annual meeting and conference in Winnipeg. On first night, we had an informal buffet dinner at A Taste of India, a restaurant near University of Winnipeg, where conference was centred. As part of evening's celebrations, our restaurant hosts invited a group of young women to come and perform some traditional South Asian dances for us. Though we were told that this group frequently performed at Folklorama, it soon became clear that this was not slick, traditionally-packaged performance locals among us had come to expect at that annual ethnic The tape began with a loud, discordant, alternative music-type introduction, which would undoubtedly have been nixed for Folklorama, since it was not an exemplar of pure, authentic(2) south Asian cultural expression. But even when music settled into a more traditional-sounding arrangement, dancers approached their presentation quite informally. Though initially displaying some nervousness, they soon began performing for each other, directing facial gestures and movements within group to comment upon their own activities. They seemed particularly amused by each others' mistakes, and their enjoyment appeared to be compounded by odd situation of performance -- not enough room for them to move freely and properly, combined with a generally culturally illiterate audience. These young women performers clearly saw themselves as being asked to represent their but they constantly undermined this position with kind of horsing around and sarcastic commentary -- albeit in a subtle form -- well known to all who interact with North American teenagers. One of our colleagues, of South Asian origin herself, commented on how much fun it was to do those dances, and how it made her wish she was still young enough to do them. It did look like fun. Multicultural festivals are increasingly marketed to Canadians as a symbol of our much-celebrated ethnic diversity. Festivals such as Toronto's Caravan and Winnipeg's work to set Canadian ethnicities apart from one another, and from mainstream, in their exhibitions of clearly delineated authenticity and uniqueness. Such diversity allegedly sets Canadian culture apart from that of our neighbours in United States; ours, colourful patchwork quilt or mosaic, in contrast to theirs, homogenisation of American melting pot. Folklorama, held for two weeks every August since 1970, combines local boosterism with big corporate sponsorship to create a tourist event.(3) Various located at different venues throughout city -- mainly in ethnic society halls, community centres, and public education buildings -- represent ethnic, linguistic, national, and/or geographical groupings. This festival, which in words of its own promotion takes you down street and around world, bills itself in easy superlatives as Canada's greatest cultural celebration, and the world's largest multicultural festival. Ethnic, linguistic, national, and/or geographical groups are represented in a pavilion -- or, in many cases, in two or more pavilions, such as Pearl of Orient Pavilion and Philippine Pavilion-Nayong Pilipino; or Ireland/Irish Pavilion and Isle of Shamrock-Ireland Pavilion. One might suspect that presence of two pavilions indicates some political discord, or even heterogeneity in cultural presentation. However, is structured in such a way as to ensure that contrasts within and between groups are masked by common presentation of three elements. Although their website suggests that Folklorama gives every group a chance to release whatever they want to express to everyone about their culture, in fact, expressions are limited almost exclusively to music/dance, food/drink, and display and sale of crafts. …
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».