Review of <i>Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision</i> Editedby Marie Battiste
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The eighteen essays collected in Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision provide, finally and in one volume, a substantive and reasonably comprehensive analysis by the first generation of Indigenous scholars of the present and future role of Indigenous Knowledge and the emerging Indigenous cultural renaissance in the global context of neocolonial Western culture and science. The book springs from an International Summer Institute at the University of Saskatchewan on the cultural restoration of oppressed Indigenous peoples held in 1996 and attended by mostly Indigenous scholars from Canada, the US, India, and New Zealand. This is not yet another book, produced by Western scientists, preoccupied with the current fashion of proving whether Indians were "good" or "bad" land stewards-with Western science analyzing Indians and perpetuating the cognitive imperialism and unequal balance of power that have been the principal cause of Indigenous academic marginalization (as in Shepard Krech's The Ecological Indian). As Asha Varadharajan of India notes, "the confusion of multiculturism with political correctness, with a mealy-mouthed sop to guilty consciences, has precluded genuine debate .... [Indigenous scholars] do not engage in an empty valorization of subjugated cultures; instead, they restore these cultures to history .... " As editor Marie Battiste-a Mi'Kmag educator and professor in the Indian and Northern Education Program at the University of Saskatchewan-writes in the Introduction, "[the book] urges an agenda of restoration within a multidisciplinary context for human dignity and collective dignity of Indigenous peoples." She has organized the volume around the Medicine Wheel of the Plains tribes, with each of the four directions of the Sacred Circle Wheel providing an interrelated historical episode in the colonization-and the future, postcolonial cultural and epistemological recovery- of Indigenous peoples: mapping colonialism, diagnosing colonialism, healing colonized Indigenous peoples, and visioning the (postcolonial) Indigenous Renaissance. Indigenous scholars from Plains tribes are represented by Leroy Little Bear of the Blood tribe of the Blackfoot Confederacy (Alberta) and former Director of the Native American Program at Harvard University, and by James (Sa'Kej') Youngblood Henderson, Cheyenne (Oklahoma), one of the leading tribal philosophers, educators, and strategists of North American Indians. Henderson's four essays provide an incisive and far-reaching critique of European colonialism. "Postcolonial Ghost Dancing: Diagnosing European Colonialism" revisits the Plains Ghost Dance, explaining this ceremony of the late nineteenth century not in messianic terms but rather "as a vision of how to release all the spirits contained in the old ceremonies and rites. The dance released these contained spirits or forces back into the deep caves of Mother Earth, where they would be immune from colonizers' strategies and techniques .... In time, through postcolonial ghost dancing, these forces would foster a new vision of Aboriginal renewal, thus restoring the traditional consciousness and order." In "Postcolonial Ledger Drawing: Legal Reform" Henderson uses the true account of how the Cheyenne, imprisoned on a reservation in Oklahoma, were given financial ledger books by whites to teach Indians about business accounting; the Cheyenne used the ledger books instead for drawing iconic images of their experiences, ceremonies, and visions. Sa'Ke'j concludes that "Like our ancestors, we need to continue the spirit of ledger drawing on Eurocentric legal texts, explaining why these texts deny our knowledge and heritage and regulate our destiny. We need to dream and realize new visions in the old ways."
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».