MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042205006 · doi:10.1353/utq.2007.0145

Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility (review)

2007· article· en· W2042205006 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kersti Krug

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionContext (archaeology)SociologyMuseologyPostmodernismTransformative learningMedia studiesAestheticsVisual artsHistoryArt historyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility Kersti Krug (bio) R.R. Janes and G.T. Conaty, editors. Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility University of Calgary Press. ix, 196. $29.95 Museums contribute to the education of our children and ourselves, to our collective memory, and to the development of our culture. In a compendium of stories edited by two eminently qualified museum colleagues, we see a movement today which promises transformative change in this historic contribution to society. The nine stories in this new book illustrate the recent experiences of museum colleagues, which provide ideas and lessons for museum professionals to advance their own contributions. In their introduction to Looking Reality in the Eye, R.R. Janes and G.T. Conaty provide an informative history of museums, art galleries, and science centres that places the current movement in useful context. Their attack on postmodern relativism reflects their critique of a disinclination among museums to be more socially responsible. It captures the chill that went through the museum community when 'Into the Heart of Africa' and [End Page 313] other exhibitions attempted to deal critically or responsibly with history, culture, and representation, but instead evoked controversy and backlash. The chapters themselves provide telling examples of museums coming out of their safe spaces, pushing socially progressive and relevant agendas that deal with the realities of our time. The case studies provide useful templates and issue challenges for others to follow. Conaty and Carver's case from Calgary's Glenbow Museum balances stories from different perspectives, ideologies, and beliefs, allowing us as visitors to question the complexity of different truths. Their chapter reminds us that doing the right thing is hard and takes time; but it's clearly worth the effort. Joanne di Cosmo, of the Canadian Museum of Nature, begins her chapter with excellent, fundamental questions that we continually need to ask ourselves. It's honest, direct, and clear. Emlyn Koster and Stephen Bauman, at the United States Library Science Center, present the most solid description of this museum movement as, essentially, social marketing: it's about making change. Janet Pieschel of the Calgary Police Service Interpretive Centre shows how even private corporations will become aligned with museums doing socially and environmentally sustainable work. With the exception of the first chapter, which is narrated in the first person singular and describes a complex project apparently devoid of problems or glitches, authors are inclusive, candid, introspective, and instructive in their descriptions of collegial collaboration and project realities. Given that each of these chapters stands alone with no continuity or structural context to the compendium, and assuming that most readers will not pore over this book from front to back, organizing the chapters in content categories might have made them easier to access and use. The first chapter, for example, could then have been put in less troublesome context for this reader within a category which reminds us that individual passion and dedication are necessary to drive effective change. Powerful arguments and instructive lessons are presented throughout the book on how museum missions can contribute to a civil society and to sustainable environments and communities. The knowledge that all museums hold in their collections and the expertise of their professional staff can be positively mobilized to identify and illustrate the issues of our communities and our world. More non–North American stories would have been welcome. The sole example, from the Auckland Museum, introduces a valuable new view and reminds us that the borders of North America need not impose limits to what we can learn from one another. The editors should be encouraged to put together another book in a few years to look reality in the eye once again, not only to monitor progress in museums becoming more responsible, responsive, and relevant, but also to build courage for rewriting museum missions and rewarding professional [End Page 314] action that builds civil, sustainable societies. Glenn Sutter and D. Worts, whose excellent chapter shows how responsible social action makes museums themselves more sustainable, should provide a follow-up. Let's keep the momentum going by taking intelligent risks, doing the right thing, making real change...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207