"Kinds of Histories That Save Lives": A Q&A on Queer Archives in Kentucky and Arizona
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
"Kinds of Histories That Save Lives":A Q&A on Queer Archives in Kentucky and Arizona Eric Gonzaba (bio), Jonathan Coleman (bio), and Jamie A. Lee (bio) Moderator's Introduction When I was asked if I would like to moderate a chat about LGBTQ archives for this special issue of the Register of the Kentucky Historical Society, I jumped at the chance.1 Simply put: I love archives. To be sure, I am not a formally trained archivist, nor a librarian or a curator. I'm an academic historian, but as nearly every historian will [End Page 445] tell you, archivists, librarians, and curators are so vital in the preservation and cultivation of the historical record. Every historian—be it in academia, in museums, in public history institutions, or somewhere else—owes a huge debt to archivists who strive every day to maintain the documents, ephemera, and artifacts of our collective past. But simply recognizing the value of archivists was not the reason I wanted to take part in this incredible opportunity to moderate this Q&A. The specific topic of LGBTQ archives is what really hooked me. Just a half a century ago, few institutional archives cared about collecting materials that dealt with the culture and experiences of gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender people. But with the growing political and social clout of LGBTQ people in the 1970s, ordinary (actually, extraordinary) LGBTQ folks began preserving their own materials, confident that their newsletters, clothing, letters, buttons, and other records might one day be able to prove queer people did exist in the past. Early LGBTQ archives developed in this period, including the Lesbian Herstory Archives based in New York in 1972, followed by the Canadian Gay Archives based in Toronto in 1973. In 1981, LGBTQ academics, archivists, and community members opened a Midwest-focused LGBTQ archive in Chicago (Gerber/Hart), while San Francisco's queers founded the GLBT Historical Society in 1985. As Aiden M. Bettine and Lindsay Kistler Mattock explain in an article on the origins of queer archives, these grassroot institutions worked together and learned from one another in their hope to preserve queer histories; these archives did not "work … in isolation." Rather, their teams, "networked together, using community and professional networks to share best-practices and support collecting efforts."2 Some fifty years into this campaign to preserve LGBTQ history, we are at a crossroads. What a time to be talking about LGBTQ history. Recent US Supreme Court decisions like Obergefell and Bostock marked significant changes to LGBTQ American life in recent years [End Page 446] (bringing marriage equality to the United States and a prohibition on job discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, respectively).3 But the past few years have also seen a rise in anti-trans rhetoric and violence, shootings at gay nightlife spots in Orlando and Colorado Springs, and a wave of new and proposed laws that target schools that want to provide inclusive and relevant LGBTQ history education. It seems that Supreme Court victories in the first two decades of the new millennium have not quelled anxieties about the existence of LGBTQ people in modern life; so much work remains. In the following discussion, I talk to two scholars who are doing some of that hard work. The first archival studies scholar and archivist is Dr. Jamie A. Lee, an associate professor of digital culture, information, and society at the University of Arizona. Lee founded Arizona's first LGBTQ archive in 2008, an oral history initiative known as the Arizona LGBTQ Storytelling Project. In 2011, Lee expanded the project into the Arizona Queer Archives (AQA). One of the most admirable aspects of Lee's AQA is its recognition that queer communities are incredibly diverse, often holding "complicated, contradictory, as well as complementary histories that can all come together [at the archives] as valid everyday knowledges and truths."4 The archive not only collects traditional newspapers and other textual documents, but also zines, eyeglasses, family videos, and more—sources that can expand our understanding of the diverse queer past. The second is Dr. Jonathan Coleman, originally from eastern Kentucky and a historian of Kentucky LGBTQ life. In 2014, he cofounded...
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,035 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,030 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».