Humor, Irony, and Indigenous Peoples: A Re-Reading of the Historical Record of the 1904 St. Louis Olympic Championship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper serves as a re-reading of the historical record concerning the participation of a Kanien’kehá:ka (Mohawk) team in the lacrosse championship of the 1904 St. Louis Olympic Games. Indigenous and deconstructionist methodological frameworks provide historians with strategies for reopening archival texts to ironic interpretation in the hope that we may better recognize the efforts of Indigenous peoples to confront and challenge colonial hegemony. Accordingly, this paper first evaluates the uncritical acceptance of a Kanien’kehá:ka lacrosse player roster comprising unconventional names into the official Olympic record. Second, a re-reading of archival texts allows us to reopen history to ironic interpretation, exposing the possibility that Kanien’kehá:ka players used humor and laughter to resist, subvert, and, ultimately, deny colonial hegemony. We may begin to support the larger missions of Indigenous resurgence and decolonization by revisiting our histories, and thus giving testimony to the past.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".