A Postcolonial Archive? On the Paradox of Practice in a Northwest Alaska Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans ce texte, l'auteur aborde les contradictions entre le post-colonialisme et les pratiques institutionnelles dans la création d'une institution d'archives d'histoire orale dans le nord-ouest de l'Alaska.Comme projet, le post-colonialisme se sert souvent d'un décentrage interprétatif des ressources que le pouvoir a colonisées.La matérialité d'une institution archivistique locale, par contre, est créée par un centrage géographique du matériel historique.La production de ce genre d'archives rend évidente un effet particulier : la constitution de sujets historiques.Jusqu'à quel point ces deux projets -le post-colonialisme et la création d'un centre d'archives -travaillent-ils vers des buts différents?Ce texte examine les ambiguïtés du post-colonialisme d'abord comme un index de l'espace historico-géographique, et ensuite comme un projet intellectuel collectif.Afin d'illustrer les contradictions entre le post-colonialisme et la création des institutions d'archives, ce texte établit le bien-fondé de ces considérations par un exemple : la fondation contemporaine d'un centre d'archives d'histoire orale dans le nord-ouest de l'Alaska.Cet exemple s'inscrit également dans deux registres : comme un projet sis dans ce que l'on peut appeler une géographie « post-coloniale » et comme une entreprise potentiellement post-coloniale.L'auteur démontre que la première description est loin de la vérité, et que les entreprises institutionnelles pour créer des archives d'histoire orale dans le nord-ouest de l'Alaska -quoiqu'elles travaillent ostensiblement contre une histoire de colonialisme -réinscrivent toutefois divers pouvoirs de colonisation.ABSTRACT In this paper, I explore contradictions between postcolonialism and the institutional practices in the creation of an oral history archive in northwest Alaska.As a project, postcolonialism often harnesses an interpretive de-centring of the resources that power has colonized.The materiality of a local institutional archive, on the other hand, is created through the geographical centring of historical material.The production of such an archive thereby renders one effect most visibly: the constitution of his-* I am indebted to Pete Tarruq Schaeffer for giving me more cause for thought and getting me started.Kotzebue's tribal government and Chukchi Campus have my sincere appreciation for their support.I am grateful to Joan Schwartz, Rich Schein, and two anonymous readers for their critiques, feedback, and insight.Thanks also to Cheryl McEwan and Alison Blunt for organizing a paper session at the Association of American Geographers annual meeting in New Orleans
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".