MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055480936 · doi:10.1353/ari.2013.0036

Hiawatha / Hereafter: Re-appropriating Longfellow’s Epic in Northern Ontario

2013· article· en· W2055480936 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

VenueAriel · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationIndigenousColonialismHistoryCultural appropriationGeographyEthnologyAnthropologyArchaeologySociologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on appropriation and re-appropriation in selected uses of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s Song of Hiawatha in Northern Ontario from the early twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, using a framework drawn from Indigenous theory on colonialism and decolonization and research on the cultural politics of race and nature. Issues of colonial resource extraction and appropriation have marked the text from its inception, as Hiawatha was based mostly on Anishinaabe narratives that were collected by Indian Agent and “ethnographer” Henry Rowe Schoolcraft in the process of his work towards the dispossession of Indigenous peoples in the Great Lakes region in the nineteenth century. In the years since its publication, Hiawatha has been a hugely influential piece of literature, north as well as south of the border. As I show, the text has signified in very different ways for settler and Indigenous communities in Northern Ontario. In the early twentieth century, Canadian Pacific Railway Colonization Officer L.O. Armstrong used the text to attract settlers and tourists to the forests of Northern Ontario through promotional pamphlets and outdoor performances of the work; to the Indigenous communities involved in the performances, however, the play held very different meanings. Today, versions of Longfellow’s text form the subject of historical and cultural transmission projects in Batchewana and Garden River First Nations. Poet Liz Howard has also worked with Longfellow’s text in producing a critique of settler resource extraction and colonial assimilation in the context of Northern Ontario. In tracing these very different uses of Hiawatha , this article builds on the work of Indigenous writers and scholars who explore colonialism as an ongoing process characterized by interconnected forms of theft and theorize methods of literary and cultural analysis to halt and reverse such processes in the context of work towards decolonization. I also draw on studies of the cultural politics of race and nature, which demonstrate how settler ideas about race and indigenousness have long been central to the construction of iconic Canadian wilderness spaces.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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