Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores exhibition-inspired themed menus in museum restaurants as a form of “critically engaged interpretation” (Meszros 2008). By proposing that themed menus in museum restaurants can connect some “interpretive communities” (Fish, 1980 Fish, S. 1980. Is there a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar])—in this article, the focus is on foodies—with the museum content through food, the analysis reveals the forms of belonging, the hierarchies of taste and the interpretive modes which are afforded to museum visitors by culinary experiences. The article discusses the themed menus in relation to broader shifts in museum interpretation, informed by demands of the “new museology” (Vergo, 1989 Vergo, P. 1989. The New Museology. New York: Reaktion. [Google Scholar]) for inclusivity, dialogue and engagement. Critical in this transformation is the process of interpretation, based on a dialogic relation between the voices in the museum and the visitors. To be relevant to contemporary audiences, museums are providing various entry points to their collections, including culinary encounters. By engaging in a closed reading of themed menus developed in restaurants at the Art Gallery of Ontario (Toronto) and the Seattle Art Museum, the article discusses the interpretive practices developed around food.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".