Documenting Expo’67: A Documentary Assemblage and Construction of an Inclusive and Multicultural Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When they said that the past is another country, they must have been imagining Canada in \n1967. That summer, Canada hosted Expo’67, an extravagant and futuristic international exposition, \nenchanting the world with its cosmopolitan eclecticism. Intimately Canadian, this occasion also celebrated \nthe country’s 100th birthday and symbolized a turning point for Canada into a more inclusive \nand multicultural society; many Canadians argue that, in fact, Expo’67 came to define Canada itself. \nBut what exactly was Expo’67, how did it enchant the world, and how did it come to define Canada \nas an inclusive and multicultural place? This article argues that the documentation – that is documents \nand documentary practices – of Expo’67 helped the ideas of Canadian inclusiveness and multiculturalism \nto emerge. First, Exp’67 was one grand document: it was an assemblage of documents that, \nwhen put together in a unified whole, allowed for the idea Expo’67 to emerge. Second, practices with \nthese documents, from their production, deployment, handling, reading, inscribing, and use, helped \nspread the idea of Expo’67 to the world, allowing those individuals not in Montreal experience Expo \nthemselves. And, third, the promotion of these documents within and across Canada helped entrench \nthe idea and fact of the country being an inclusive and multicultural society. Applying documentation \ntheories to Expo’67 – Bernd Frohmann’s constitutive effects of documentation, Bruno Latour’s map, \nNiels Windfeld Lund’s documentation of an art museum exhibit, as well as Janine Marchessault’s \nconcept of the ‘media city’ and Benedict Anderson’s idea of the ‘monument’– helps illuminate the \nnumerous roles and effects that documentation had on this spectacular occasion. Documentation was \nan integral component of Expo’67, and without it, Expo’67 would have been only a transient dream \nrather than a physical reality working upon the international dreams of the world and the national \nimaginings of Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".