Bears and Scents of Place in Sid Marty’s The Black Grizzly of Whiskey Creek
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most Western humans think of more-than-human animals as having certain spatial requirements adequate to their needs to feed, reproduce and survive but assume that their territorial needs are more or less generic and interchangeable. In his acclaimed literary nonfiction book The Black Grizzly of Whiskey Creek (2008) Sid Marty represents the spaces and places of two bears, a black bear and a grizzly bear. In this animal biography cum forensic account of a series of bear attacks upon humans in Banff, Alberta, Canada, during eleven days in 1980, Marty reconstructs the events by researching the particular bears and interviewing the wardens involved, and factoring in the climatic and environmental forces – particularly the eruption that spring of Mount St. Helens and the concomitant alteration of weather patterns and plant growth as far away as Banff, Alberta – that led to the unusually high number of tragic bear-human encounters that summer. I argue that The Black Grizzly of Whiskey Creek, several chapters of which Marty writes in the third-person as if from the points of view of each of the two individual bears involved, allows us to explore how we might think of bears’ and by extension other more-than-human animals’ senses of place and exemplifies how literary works can play a role in coming to understand more fully the lives of some of our animal relations. I argue that bears’ tremendous olfactory senses are so indelibly connected with their familiar surroundings as to constitute a veritable “scents of place.”
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".