“Nothing but a string of beads”: Maud Allan’s Salomé Costume as a “choreographic thing”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In February 2013, Toronto-based archive and publisher Dance Collection Danse (DCD) announced that it would be sending “Maud Allan’s historic Salomé costume to the Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) in Ottawa” (“Winter News”). The costume, one of the most shocking and frequently cited of the early twentieth century, came to the archive in 1995 as a donation from Allan biographer Felix Cherniavsky, and has been one of its most beloved treasures since then. 1 Several years ago, the archivists noticed that the costume’s century-old fabric and beadwork were deteriorating and applied to the government-funded CCI for support. 2 The CCI’s willingness to accept the Salomé costume for conservation work and thereby acknowledge its place within Canada’s cultural heritage is politically important in light of the Conservative government’s massive cuts to Library and Archives Canada (LAC) (Hall, “Historical Letters”; Cobb). 3 As numerous archival projects across the country collapse from the withdrawal of funding, Maud Allan’s Salomé costume has gained another lease on life. In the wake of the distressing LAC cuts, this essay explores what we might learn from theatrical costumes about absent bodies, past performances, and the pressing need today to preserve historical objects for an imagined future. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".