Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: The Vengeful Wife and Other Blackfoot Stories Theodore Binnema The Vengeful Wife and Other Blackfoot Stories. Hugh A. Dempsey. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003. Pp. 304, illus. $34.95 In 2002 Hugh Dempsey published Firewater, a first-rate narrative history of the whiskey trade of Montana and Alberta. The Vengeful Wife is Dempsey's book for 2003 (his fifteenth, if I'm not mistaken). Very unlike Firewater, The Vengeful Wife is similar to Dempsey's The Amazing Death of Calf Shirt (1994). In all of his books Dempsey combines his flair for biography and storytelling with his deep knowledge of and appreciation for the Blackfoot peoples and their past and with his vast knowledge of the documentary record and oral evidence to produce entertaining stories that resonate with an unromantic realism. But in books like The Vengeful Wife and The Amazing Death of Calf Shirt, Dempsey appears to relish the freedom that a semi-fictional prose style gives him to educate his readers even as he entertains them. It allows him to present some of his interpretations of Blackfoot history - rooted in many years of experience and research - for which he could not possibly provide citations. The vehicle of semi-fictional stories is not one that academic historians often find easy to deal with, and one they very rarely use, but The Vengeful Wife is not only a gift to the general reader but a contribution worthy of a scholarly press. [End Page 578] The stories in The Vengeful Wife date from the period between the 1770s to the early twentieth century. In some ways the stories differ greatly. At least one is based purely on stories handed down by Blackfoot people from generation to generation, but at least one other cites only documentary evidence produced by non-Blackfoot people. Many include passages between quotation marks that are almost certainly not verbatim quotes of actual conversations. Some stories incorporate details (animal-human friendships, for example) that most contemporary readers will not accept as literally true, whereas others are rooted in attempts to reconstruct past events in ways typical of empirical historians. What connects all of these stories is Dempsey's desire to tell stories about the Blackfoot past in ways that draw upon authentic Blackfoot storytelling conventions. One can almost imagine each of these stories, if delivered orally, captivating and amusing a small audience gathered together to while away a long dark winter's evening. The stories in this book deal with a variety of themes of interest to scholars, ranging from issues of childhood, gender relations ('They Acted Like Women'), and identity ('Was Mary White Really White?'), to the significance of warfare in Blackfoot life, and the challenges of adjusting to reserve life. Dempsey's stories do not portray the Blackfoot people either as noble or ignoble savages but as real people coping with the kinds of issues every human society faces. At the same time, Dempsey is a sympathetic and imaginative storyteller. Even those scholars who find it difficult to accept these stories as academic history might just find themselves lured and informed by the evocative and poignant stories. I suspect Dempsey would be pleased with that result. Theodore Binnema University of Northern British Columbia Copyright © 2004 University of Toronto Press
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".