Transcending Borders: The Bold New World of Collaboration in Museums
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across Borders: Beadwork in Iroquois Life is an exhibition celebrating the significance of beadwork in Iroquois society and responds admirably to the goals of collaborative museum exhibiting set forth by the Task Force on Museums and First Peoples (1992).(f.1) The exhibition's title refers to the political and social barriers that the various Iroquois nations have traversed since European contact. Perhaps a better title to capture the essence of the exhibition would be Transcending Borders; for the exhibit demonstrates that many of the borders we perceive to exist are, in fact, imaginary. For example, the six nations that comprise the Hodenasaunee straddle the U.S.-Canadian border; confederacy has endured despite the imposition of a World political boundary. Across Borders transcends other less-tangible borders such as the seemingly incompatible natures of academic research and oral traditions and the Western museological tradition of treating First Peoples as objects versus First Peoples' assertion of identity and agency. Across Borders makes great strides to prove that these dichotomies are false.Across Borders is the result of a collaborative effort between the McCord Museum, the Castellani Art Museum of Niagara University, the Kenien'kehaka Raotitiohkwa Cultural Center in Kahnawake, the Tuscarora Nation community beadworkers within New York state and the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto. The exhibition recognizes different kinds of knowledge by including information from oral traditions and interviews with beadwork artists as well as from academic research in the text panels and artifact labels. This kind of collaboration surpasses the token efforts of consultation too often made by museums after the curatorial process is firmly established. Iroquois and non-First Nations curators worked together on both the design and the interpretation of the exhibit. Such collaboration between First Nations and non-Aboriginal people in a traditional museum setting raises several challenging questions. Institutional authority, museological procedures, the rights to information and its use and academic freedom are questioned when these two groups interact in the zone (Ames, 1999: 41-42).Clifford suggests that when museums are seen as contact zones their organizing structure as a collection becomes an ongoing historical, political and moral relationship -- a power-charged set of exchanges, in which the processes of the colonial encounter are unfinished (1997: 192). As a contact zone, he envisions museums as potential theatres for continuing negotiations between the protagonists of the colonial narrative. By allowing First Peoples increased access to material culture and a more prominent voice in the interpretation of heritage, the colonial encounter will continue but the balance of power may be redressed.Across Borders combines over 300 beaded objects with oral histories, photography and written archives to create a nuanced interpretation of Iroquois beadwork. The works on display range from political and historical documents such as the Two-Dog Wampum, which represents an 18th-century peace agreement between the Mohawk of Kahnesata:ke and the French colonists, to household items, clothing and tourist curios. This diversity of material demonstrates the pervasion of beadwork in Iroquois society. The creation of beadwork is not simply a leisure activity. Its importance can be understood only in relation to Iroquois kinship, history and cosmology.The exhibition describes the production of Iroquois beadwork by presenting the raw materials used such as bone, shell, wampum and porcupine quills. It also explains the patterns and sewing methods employed in making beadwork. But Iroquois beadwork is not treated as a mere craft, even the descriptions of production make lateral connections that convey the social significance of beadwork. One text panel describes how the creation of beadwork unites all generations. …
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 | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.038 | 0.035 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.035 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".