MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W15779149

Autobiographic Narrative in the Drawings of Napachie and Annie Pootoogook

2012· dissertation· en· W15779149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karolina Tomaszewskska

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrintmakingNarrativeHybridityVisual artsMotif (music)ModernityArtScholarshipRepresentation (politics)AestheticsFine artSociologyPaintingLiteratureEpistemologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June of 2005, Windows on Kinngait featuring drawings by Annie Pootoogook and Napachie Pootoogook had opened at the Feheley Fine Arts Gallery in Toronto. With this thesis I set out to compare these two art practices, focusing on how each artist approaches issues related to gender and how they tackle the motif of modernity through representations of landscapes (both indoor and outdoor) and objects, all of which convey much about the personal lives of these women. They will be examined in terms of how space, and the things that fill it, are utilized to convey an idea about personal representation. In order to understand the inventive drawing practices developed by Napachie and Annie, I will trace the changing status of drawing as a medium in relation to the printmaking tradition; I will also introduce some other artists from Kinngait (Cape Dorset) who have explored the tension between traditional and contemporary motifs in their work. In theoretical terms, I use Hertha Dawn Wong’s scholarship on forms of indigenous autobiography and the postcolonial concept of hybridity (as put forward by Homi Bhabha) to illuminate the 20th-century transformations in Inuit artmaking, as exemplified in the art of Napachie and Annie Pootoogook.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207