Not so fragile : an ethnography of women glass blowers in western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guided by the principles of feminist ethnography and the philosophy of dialogical phenomenology, this research explores the glass community in western Canada through the eyes of seventeen women glass blowers. This unique collection of experiences elucidates the changes that have occurred in the glass community over the past four decades, and contributes to the story of glass in Canadian art and craft history. The glass world and glass objects exist in the liminal space between art and craft. As a place of growth and change, the liminal space is the antithesis of structure which therefore invites dialogue and creative development. By proposing that glass objects exist in the liminal space between art and craft, I am further proposing that women glass blowers in this space have formed a liminal 'communitas' shaped by their shared experiences. As there has been no ethnographic research done with women glass blowers in western Canada, it is of paramount importance to highlight the words and experiences of these experts; through their eyes we gain an understanding of the elite community of glass blowers in western Canada, and the challenges they face in their chosen career. Therefore, I have chosen to write the body of this dissertation in a narrative style, which not only honours the true spirit, if not intent of feminist research, but pays homage to these women by respecting that their words have relevance and should not be buried in theoretical generalizations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".