Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: The Theatre of Regret by David Gaertner Melanie Braith (bio) The Theatre of Regret by David Gaertner University of British Columbia Press, 2020 david gaertner’s The Theatre of Regret provides an in-depth critique of the concept of reconciliation and corresponding practices in the context of Canada’s residential schools, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), and ongoing settler colonialism. Gaertner, an assistant professor in the Institute of Critical Indigenous Studies at the University of British Columbia, writes as a settler scholar who criticizes settler colonial structures and unmasks their insidious, contemporary mechanisms. One argument at the heart of this monograph is that in Canada, “reconciliation has been recaptured by colonialism” (5). However, demonstrating how colonialism has coopted reconciliation is only half of the work that Gaertner sets out to do. The Theatre of Regret also inspires its readers to think about what alternative conceptualizations of reconciliation could look like. As a settler scholar, Gaertner is careful not to take up too much space in this discussion as he finds it “imperative that we insist on a reconciliation that centres Indigenous perspectives and creates space for Indigenous voices by quieting settler colonial attempts to define the work” (227). Hence, Gaertner’s methodology is related to what Métis scholar Judi Iseke defines as “pedagogical witnessing” (10), and for Gaertner, witnessing is an act that is “generated in the reciprocal act of listening to and sharing stories and the active deconstruction of settler colonial narratives” (10). Part of this methodology is to create space to amplify Indigenous voices. Therefore, The Theatre of Regret listens to Indigenous art and literature to learn how they imagine reconciliation. A significant strength of Gaertner’s work is that he embeds his critique of reconciliation in settler colonial Canada within a thorough discussion of the concept’s international history. Gaertner examines the Nuremberg trials and TRCs that have occurred in Uganda, Chile, Australia, and South Africa. Scholarly work that compares the TRC in Canada to South Africa’s TRC from 1995 to 2002 has been published in the past, and Gaertner, like others before him, points out that Canada (as opposed to South Africa) is a country where a Truth and Reconciliation Commission occurred without political [End Page 101] transition. This fact forms a basis for Gaertner’s analyses, and the book’s title refers to reconciliation practices in which “concrete political transition is never a part of the terms of conversation” (51). In the theatre of regret, “reconciliation is founded on the promise of change and performances that convince the audience that while the government remains structurally and ideologically unchanged, it will now act differently” (51). Gaertner’s analyses demonstrate how and where the theatre of regret is at work in Canada. He is, however, careful not to discard the work of residential school survivors, and he makes sure to acknowledge that the TRC is “a judicially determined survivor initiative” and not “a government instrument” even though many Canadians still believe it to be the latter (225). The book’s four chapters are arranged according to “four of the key stages on the path to reconciliation: acknowledgement, apology, redress, and forgiveness” (16). In each chapter, Gaertner analyzes one key concept and how it has been enacted within the framework of reconciliation in Canada. Then he performs compelling literary analyses that illustrate how Indigenous artists and writers conceive of the concept under discussion. For example, Gaertner analyzes Cherokee and Greek author Thomas King’s parody of the apology industry in Green Grass, Running Water together with Métis playwright Marie Clemens’s Burning Vision and its character Rose’s angry monologue on hollow apologies in Canadian contexts. Gaertner contrasts these texts with former conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s apology to residential school survivors. Other writers that are analyzed at length include Nlaka’pamux playwright Kevin Loring, Anishinaabe author Richard Wagamese, Haisla and Heiltsuk author Eden Robinson, and Métis author Cherie Dimaline. When discussing the concept of forgiveness, Gaertner engages with the work of Japanese internment survivor Joy Kogawa—a discussion that fits well with the book’s analysis of redress that takes the Japanese Canadian Redress Agreement into account when discussing...
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".