Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I introduce the methodology of curatorial dreaming as a tool for exploring possibilities and limitations of critical heritage in Canada. Curatorial dreams are imagined exhibitions or interventions in museums, galleries, and heritage and vernacular sites. For our volume, Curatorial Dreams: Critics Imagine Exhibitions, my co-editor Erica Lehrer and I tasked scholars to propose exhibitions in response to their own critiques of museums and broader social landscapes. This article focuses on curatorial dreaming workshops that I have facilitated with curators, educators, activists, students, and scholars. I argue for the value of responding creatively, concretely, and constructively to problematic exhibitions and heritage products. My examples include an advertising campaign for Yum Yum Potato Chips in Quebec, the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ representation of queer history and struggle, and the Women Are Persons monument that faces the Senate on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. In describing and analyzing curatorial dreaming in relation to these display sites, I compare realistic and impossible curatorial dreams and conclude by challenging mainstream, establishment museums and heritage sites to honour and acknowledge refusals and difficulties.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".