Bibliographic record
Abstract
My paper is a study of the sixty year history of the inukshuk’s cultural appropriations from humanoid-rock-formation to Canadian-Nunavut-Olympics icon. It traces the inukshuk variant in Canadian visual culture from its Inuit source in southern Canada to its cultural appropriations in popular culture, state insignia and in the monuments and stone formations that thread the Canadian wilderness into an east to west tundra simulacra. It focuses on issues of cultural appropriation and Canadian identity representation, which are significant for current cultural property relations between nation-state, the Fourth World and the Olympics. Comparing the interrelationship between the references to Canada’s northern landscape in the Vancouver 2010 Olympics logo, known as Ilanaaq, and the Nunavut and Canadian flags’ foregrounds the complexity of the cultural property debate. I posit that the visual pairing of the inukshuk and the maple leaf in the design of Ilanaaq demonstrates how the idea of Canada-as-North has evolved into a multicultural tundra simulacrum. This evolution has occurred in tandem with official recognition of Inuit voice in the formation of Nunavut. I come to the assertion that in the image of Ilanaaq the essentialist division between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians nevertheless persists in an idea of Canada as multicultural nation. Unless Ilanaaq’s likeness to the Nunavut flag provides an alternative reading for the Canadian-Olympics icon as reapreappropriated symbol of Inuit self-representation, the VANOC logo is nothing more than a problematic form of Canadian identity representation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".