STEPHEN JOHNSON, ed., A Tyranny of Documents: The Performing Arts Historian as Film Noir Detective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
transformative potential as it sets out to "spark a shift in historical understanding: it wants to demonstrate powerfully, viscerally, exhaustively that ordinary people shape history" (p.176).Archivists, like historians, have been trained to be wary of subjective interpretations, particularly when it comes to the tasks of accessioning and appraisal.What Letting Go? brings to our attention is that sharing authority requires us to admit that we are emotional about our work and it is not easy to let go.There is much to be learned from our museum colleagues, in particular how to balance our professional duties to develop and care for collections for future use and our responsibility to serve the present needs of our publics, including people who will never set foot in the archives.What Adair, Filene, and Koloski promise is that sharing authority may throw light on the limitations of heritage institutions, but it also reasserts the expertise of heritage workers.Sharing does not mean giving over.It does, perhaps, mean a significant shift in our cultural roles from "sole interpreters" to "cultural facilitators."Once we have admitted to our vulnerabilities, we can then move on to serve as stewards of cultural history and provide guidance, when requested, to audiences who would like to take the making of heritage into their own hands.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".