Beading Identity: An Exploration into Métis Deathscapes, Kinscapes, and Colonial Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Métis ancestors are a powerful force. It is through them that we understand our identity, our culture, and our relationships to each other, to place, and to land. Their names alone are enough to build and rebuild bonds between people regardless of distance or age, but names are not the only piece of our ancestors that have been left to us. Their bodies act as roots in the earth, anchoring us to the land – a symbol of our existence. This thesis chronicles the path I took in my attempt to comprehend the relationship between the living, the dead, and the land, and how it relates to Métis identity. Using the landscape of the Batoche National Historic Site, I seek to explore the ways in which the living kinscape creates and engages with the deathscape of this region. Often viewed as landscapes that have connections to mortuary practices, deathscapes can also extend to include the ways in which memory is understood and how the landscape is imbued with a power that can be linked to belonging and exclusion. In visiting with Batoche, I am able to place this research in a place where Métis identity and culture intersect on the Saskatchewan landscape with Canadian history across space and time. Understanding the complexity of this deathscape and the extent of its influence requires this thesis to draw on a number of theoretical bodies of work, both archaeologically and Indigenous focused, to create and implement a framework based on the Métis practices of beading and beadwork to assist in demonstrating the relationship between these factors. In the end, I argue that being able to experience and engage with these spaces is fundamental to the understanding of Métis identity. Doing so creates a powerful and intimate connection that is necessary for a strong sense of identity and ultimately allows us to continue to resist colonialism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".