Kenneth Peacock's Songs of the Newfoundland outports: the cultural politics of a Newfoundland song collection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between 1951 and 1961, under the influence of anthropologist Marius Barbeau, \nKenneth Howard Peacock (1923-2000), a classically trained musician and composer from \nOntario, visited Newfoundland six times on behalf of the National Museum of Canada to \ncollect folksongs, later producing a three-volume work, Songs of the Newfoundland \nOutports (1965). While Peacock's work has been celebrated by many, his approach to \nfolk culture documentation has often concerned scholars. This study articulates the \nsocio-cultural impact of Outports in Newfoundland and Canada by outlining to persons \nwho have misunderstood Peacock's research what he was trying to accomplish. It takes \ninto account the status of folklore research at the National Museum in the 1950s and the \nconditions under which Peacock carried out this work. It provides a critical review of \nPeacock's Newfoundland fieldwork with a view to better understanding his motivations \nfor creating Outports and his treatment of the materials he collected. \nAlong with such peers as Marins Barbeau, Helen Creighton, Edith Fowke, Tom \nKines, Sam Gesser and Alan Mills, Peacock is a noted pioneer contributing substantially \nto our understanding of Canadian folklore and the shaping of Canadian folklore \nscholarship. He took over the Newfoundland research from former School of Music \nclassmate Margaret Sargent (McTaggart) in 1951. Leaving his composing career in the \ndistance he devoted the next twenty years to researching the country 's ethnic and native musical traditions. This study takes into consideration the cultural politics of the day \nsuch as National Museum policies and directions at the time and how the growth of the \nCanadian folk revival during the1950s and '60s influenced his work. It considers the \ndynamic relations between Peacock and other individuals who had a vested interest in \ndocumenting and presenting Newfoundland culture including Maud Karpeles and folk \nrevivalist Ralph Rinzler. \nAlthough Peacock's representation of Newfoundland's folk culture tended to be \noverly-romanticized, reflecting his Toronto upbringing, his work has had a long-lasting \nimpact. It later reshaped Newfoundlanders' views of the extent of their own musical \ntraditions and contributed to the Newfoundland-centered folk revival. As a revivalist \nPeacock was driven to see that music from his field research would be made available to \nCanadians. Analysis of his Newfoundland collection reveals, however, that Peacock \nedited and reworked both texts and music. This is addressed in the thesis through the \ncreation of a scholarly tool called a "Catalogue of Kenneth Peacock's Music Collection" \nlinking his published and unpublished materials into one useable explanatory unit. New \nknowledge regarding Peacock's life and times facilitates our understanding of this man's \nimmense contribution to both Newfoundland and Canadian folklore scholarship while at \nthe same time allowing researchers to make greater use of the materials he so diligently \ncollected.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".