MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1918884067 · doi:10.3138/topia.32.43

Law and Order in the Arctic: “The Smiling People” and <i>RCMP</i>

2015· article· en· W1918884067 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Joan Isabel Sangster

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPaternalismMythologyWhite (mutation)ColonialismTelevision seriesHEROEconomic JusticeNarrativeHistorySociologyLawGender studiesLiteratureMedia studiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 19th century, Canadian culture has been rife with Mountie lore, and since the 1970s, many critics have deconstructed the Mountie myth, showing how this police force was romanticized in both non-fiction and fiction alike. This paper explores one example of such cultural mythmaking: a fictional television script about law and order involving Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in the Canadian North. “The Smiling People” was one episode in the 1959 television series, RCMP, produced by Crawley films, the BBC, and CBC, and shown in Canada as well as around the world. The RCMP series featured a small-town detachment of three RCMP men in northern Saskatchewan who sometimes ventured further north to bring their version of policing and justice to both whites and Aboriginal peoples alike. In the case of “The Smiling People,” an Inuit woman is charged with the murder of her husband; the episode covers the unfolding trial as the Mountie hero uncovers the truth about the murder. “The Smiling People” offers a story about the “contact zone” of white and Inuit which features the clash of cultures, the imposition of white values, yet the paternalistic, and ultimately ‘superior’ knowledge claims of white, southern legal practices. As such, it is an excellent example of the emerging cultural justifications for colonial consolidation in the North in the post-World War II period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0380.028
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207