Kenneth Peacock's Songs of the Newfoundland outports: the cultural politics of a Newfoundland song collection
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Between 1951 and 1961, under the influence of anthropologist Marius Barbeau, \nKenneth Howard Peacock (1923-2000), a classically trained musician and composer from \nOntario, visited Newfoundland six times on behalf of the National Museum of Canada to \ncollect folksongs, later producing a three-volume work, Songs of the Newfoundland \nOutports (1965). While Peacock's work has been celebrated by many, his approach to \nfolk culture documentation has often concerned scholars. This study articulates the \nsocio-cultural impact of Outports in Newfoundland and Canada by outlining to persons \nwho have misunderstood Peacock's research what he was trying to accomplish. It takes \ninto account the status of folklore research at the National Museum in the 1950s and the \nconditions under which Peacock carried out this work. It provides a critical review of \nPeacock's Newfoundland fieldwork with a view to better understanding his motivations \nfor creating Outports and his treatment of the materials he collected. \nAlong with such peers as Marins Barbeau, Helen Creighton, Edith Fowke, Tom \nKines, Sam Gesser and Alan Mills, Peacock is a noted pioneer contributing substantially \nto our understanding of Canadian folklore and the shaping of Canadian folklore \nscholarship. He took over the Newfoundland research from former School of Music \nclassmate Margaret Sargent (McTaggart) in 1951. Leaving his composing career in the \ndistance he devoted the next twenty years to researching the country 's ethnic and native musical traditions. This study takes into consideration the cultural politics of the day \nsuch as National Museum policies and directions at the time and how the growth of the \nCanadian folk revival during the1950s and '60s influenced his work. It considers the \ndynamic relations between Peacock and other individuals who had a vested interest in \ndocumenting and presenting Newfoundland culture including Maud Karpeles and folk \nrevivalist Ralph Rinzler. \nAlthough Peacock's representation of Newfoundland's folk culture tended to be \noverly-romanticized, reflecting his Toronto upbringing, his work has had a long-lasting \nimpact. It later reshaped Newfoundlanders' views of the extent of their own musical \ntraditions and contributed to the Newfoundland-centered folk revival. As a revivalist \nPeacock was driven to see that music from his field research would be made available to \nCanadians. Analysis of his Newfoundland collection reveals, however, that Peacock \nedited and reworked both texts and music. This is addressed in the thesis through the \ncreation of a scholarly tool called a "Catalogue of Kenneth Peacock's Music Collection" \nlinking his published and unpublished materials into one useable explanatory unit. New \nknowledge regarding Peacock's life and times facilitates our understanding of this man's \nimmense contribution to both Newfoundland and Canadian folklore scholarship while at \nthe same time allowing researchers to make greater use of the materials he so diligently \ncollected.
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 | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,030 | 0,015 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 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 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 ».