MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410632589 · doi:10.22215/etd/2025-16441

Assembling Bodies: the Museum Exhibition as Apparatus of Bodily Production in Canada and the United Kingdom

2025· dissertation· en· W4410632589 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionProduction (economics)Visual artsArtMuseologyKingdomArt historyBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Museums have displayed archaeological human remains, alongside material culture, as a way of interpreting past human life for several centuries. Disciplines such as osteo-archaeology and physical anthropology have developed nuanced practices for analyzing and presenting knowledge about bodies alongside the project of natural and cultural history museums to tell the story of human antiquity. Beginning in the 20th century, the collection and display of human remains by museums has been met with resistance and contestation both in localized cultural and geographical contexts, and through globalized movements for repatriation and decolonization. In Canada, the strong activism of Indigenous communities to repatriate material culture and ancestral remains has made the display of any human remains an uncommon practice with a few exceptions. In the United Kingdom, archaeologists and museum curators must navigate the public’s desire to view their own prehistoric ancestors with shifting global practices. This dissertation observes how human remains came to be included within Western (Canadian and British) museum collections, how they have been displayed in museums, and how they have been contested by publics and become the centre of global movements for repatriation led by Indigenous nations around the world. Rather than take up the display of human remains as an ethical debate, it seeks to understand how bodies are otherwise materialized in museum exhibitions through ethnographic fieldwork and case studies. Drawing from new materialist and posthumanist theory, it considers how museum exhibitions “produce” bodies through a range of material and discursive practices that challenge notions of humanism and authenticity. While wider national contexts are considered, particular exhibitions are identified at the Canadian Museum of History and Canadian War Museum in Ottawa, Canada, and the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh, Scotland. Site visits and exhibition analysis are further considered alongside qualitative interviews with museum curators, interpretive planners, conservators and archaeologists. The dissertation finally considers the future of posthumanist approaches to studying and interpreting bodies and past human life in the museum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0270.014
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207