Presidential Address. Starting with Water: Canada, Colonialism, and History at 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How does history look when we begin with water? Here, I want to address the possibilities of thinking about water, particularly through the its relationship to colonialism, and especially in the watery, geographical centre of North America that we might call the western edge of the Annishinaabeg world, and we also might call the space between modern Winnipeg and the Lake of the Woods. To discuss histories of water here, I will draw on Indigenous Studies, critical colonial history, histories of the environment, and urban space, and the questions prompted by the present of 2019, sitting as it does in the wake of the completion of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 2015, and the commemoration of the sesquicentennial of the British North America Act (BNA) in 2017. As the Canadian Historical Association/Société Historique du Canada (CHA/SHC) approaches its 100th anniversary in 2022, and as we think and act around the role of scholarly disciplines, including history, in the institutional, social, and intellectual scaffolding of the ongoing project of Canadian colonialism. These are some of the questions that water can lead us to. I will begin by talking about water, history, and settler colonialism, and then turn to histories of water at the meeting of the Red and Assiniboine rivers, and to histories of dispossession in the Lake of the Woods watershed before returning to our colonial present, and the role of histories and historians in that present.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.232 | 0.048 |
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".