Narratives in the Editing Bay: The Making of and the Rivers Flow: Hunting and Treaty Rights in a First Nations Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis describes the filming and post-production strategy used to develop the ethnographic film, And the Rivers Flow: Hunting and Treaty Rights in a First Nations Community. This paper outlines my process, suggesting that an engaging, dramatic film can emerge quite naturally by examining the narratives already present in filmed footage. I suggest that, if framed carefully, the final presented narrative can correspond to both the dramaturgical conventions of Western drama and the anthropological criteria of Victor Turner's social drama (1996). And the Rivers Flow tells the story of two First Nations hunters who were charged with trespassing and illegally hunting on land they considered to be traditional territory safe for hunting. Throughout the story, viewers are taken along on a late-summer moose hunt where respect, knowledge, and a spiritual connection to the land are just as important as any piece of equipment. Combining documentary storytelling with ethnographic footage, And the Rivers Flow adds to the growing discourse surrounding the perpetuation of native peoples' traditional beliefs in spite of encroaching development and outside governmental pressures.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.009 | 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".