MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003148095 · doi:10.1353/tech.2010.0004

The Archive of Place: Unearthing the Pasts of the Chilcotin Plateau (review)

2010· article· en· W2003148095 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Culture · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgument (complex analysis)Plateau (mathematics)PoliticsHistorySociologyArt historyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Archive of Place: Unearthing the Pasts of the Chilcotin Plateau John C. Walsh (bio) The Archive of Place: Unearthing the Pasts of the Chilcotin Plateau. By William J. Turkel. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2007. Pp. xxvi+322. $36.95. William Turkel's The Archive of Place is about a whole range of techne: technology, techniques, technicians, and technicalities. It is less a critique of such things as an exploration both of and with them. It is not, despite its title, a sustained engagement with the growing body of literature stemming from the archival turn in the social sciences and humanities. The former is unquestionably the book's greatest strength but the latter, perhaps, its most frustrating shortcoming. The Archive of Place explores how place, in this instance the Chilcotin Plateau in the interior of present-day British Columbia, becomes marked, filled, and otherwise affected by time. Its most enduring argument is that historians can and ought to recognize the indexicality of material traces bequeathed by time's effect on place and to identify how these traces and later ways of knowing them render all places as contested, negotiated, and (re)-constructed landscapes. This argument is developed through three discrete, carefully organized case studies that both begin and end in the 1990s but which stretch back in both geological and human time. The case studies are well chosen, for each represents a distinct historical episode, but they also overlap in their involvement with the politics of land claims and aboriginal peoples in late-twentieth-century British Columbia: mining at Fish Lake, commemoration of the Mackenzie Heritage Trail, and the landscaping of place and identity that stemmed from the mid-nineteenth-century Chilcotin War. Readers of this journal will likely find the first two case studies most compelling for the multifaceted and influential roles played by both technologies and a variety of sciences. T&C readers will be impressed at how widely Turkel has read in history and the social sciences, and also in natural history and the natural sciences, but it is Turkel's acknowledged-yet-unclear relationship to Bruno Latour (the Latour of Science in Action) that is perhaps most intriguing and beguiling. Turkel explores how various institutional networks, located in government, business, and local communities, made possible and necessary a whole host of knowledge-making by an equally diverse number of actors. This is especially strong in the first two case studies. Among other things, we read about technicians hanging from helicopters and snipping samples from the tops of pine trees so that biogeochemists could assess concentrations of precious metals and minerals located deep below the surfaces around Fish Lake, and we learn about archaeologists unearthing fragments of pottery and other matériel in order to re-map trade routes and migratory habits of the region's aboriginal population and the non-aboriginal explorers, traders, and settlers who arrived (starting in the late eighteenth century) hundreds of years later. In short, we learn about how scientific and [End Page 772] technical knowledge was made, including the epistemological and political structures that shaped this process. Unlike Latour, however, Turkel is not an active part of this book's identification and deconstruction of the techne involved with knowing and governing the Chilcotin Plateau. Indeed, to the above list of actors one could add a twenty-first-century academic historian, armed with a digitial camera, GPS equipment, and GIS-related software who encountered, explored, documented, archived, and then, in ways not unlike the biogeochemists and archaeologists, processed this data. It is thus somewhat frustrating that, in a book about various ways of knowledge-making in a contest for being the most powerful (or what, following Michel Foucault, we would also call "truthful"), we read a sentence like this: "On Mackenzie's route, for example, there are house pits located at 32.76 kilometres and more at 147.80 kilometres, protected now as heritage sites" (p. 118). The reader is told nothing of how Turkel came to report such technicalities, aside from a tantalizing clue provided by Graeme Wynn in the book's preface about how the book was researched and written. Nor do we read any kind of self-reflection...

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.204 · 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