Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores possibilities for constructing creole subjects through world music education. Creolization results from the “fusing and mixing of cultures forced to cohabit together to render something else possible” (Walcott, 2009, p. 170 citing Hall, 2003, p. 193). As cultures fuse musically, our identity shifts. We become creole subjects through the encounters we experience, particularly, Walcott (2009) posits, in highly diverse urban spaces. The mobile nature of cultures is intrinsic to world music. My participation in an Ewe ensemble in Toronto demonstrates that cultures travel musically. The question then becomes: when cultures travel, who or what is refigured or remade and what becomes possible after the encounter? I posit that these encounters affect all parties; people become creole subjects—subjects constantly affected by their continuously changing cultural environments. In this paper, I think about this idea from a utopian perspective. I find thinking in this manner particularly useful in thinking about the future. In many ways, I feel we are mired down in academia with discussions of race and the “crisis of raciology” (Gilroy, 2000, Chapter 1) and that it might be quite productive to think beyond. I begin by arguing that there is the potential for world music education to be a colonizing project. I look specifically to Said (1993) and Thobani (2007) to inform my thinking on this topic. From there, I explore what might happen when an encounter facilitated through world music education occurs and the impact that this encounter could have on the way we define the category of the human. Finally, I think about what might occur after this encounter and redefinition take place.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".