Le katajjaq inuit au-delà de la patrimonialisation : de l’ethnographie à la recherche-création
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Located between the cry and the vocal, katajjaq has always fascinated Westerners but has been the source of numerous controversies (cultural appropriation, epistemic equity, Indigenous cultural continuity). These controversies have hindered intercultural exchanges while as traditional knowledge emerges as a way to deal with contemporary crises. Thus, musicians, composers, and institutions face significant challenges navigating between the temptations of differentialist withdrawal and a quest for reductionist universalism. Competing postures are observed, whether from scientists, Indigenous people, or creators. In all cases, the adopted strategies tend to essentialize katajjaq, as both musicological and heritage approaches have primarily sought to determine what katajjaq is, overlooking its nature as a playful activity that makes things happened. Therefore, it was crucial to pay more attention to katajjaq as an activity rather than its product, and for this reason, research and performance could not be dissociated.The objective of this research-creation was to try to better understand how Inuit culture could be distributed in katajjaq as a technique. The aim was to observe and describe, in situ, its ability to disrupt well-established categories (such as music, tradition, creation, participation, or experimentation) when engaged with other more contemporary techniques. Through (auto)ethnography, we were able to document how katajjaq questioned our own practices. Fieldwork then became our primary creative constraint, and we had to explore contexts in which we could initiate this new approach to a living heritage like katajjaq. The Arts and Sciences device then emerged as a possible new horizon for heritage-making, as they involved a fruitful and symmetrical encounter of different epistemes and practices. These device enable agreement on a shared activity rather than a set of intellectual or aesthetic propositions. Thus, these device, which have proven beneficial in the field of digital arts and contemporary art, seemed to be applicable to traditional arts and knowledge, challenging the roles of dedicated spaces for both research and creation.By closely following katajjaq and combining the strengths of art and anthropology, we found ourselves giving less importance to the work and its author, focusing instead on what happens when people gather around sonic activities. We have thus gained a better understanding of the switch-like role of sound productions when they enable the establishment of a gray area of encounter. This led us to view creation not merely as a renewal of musical language (rupture) but as a way to establish a common language (reunion), linking aesthetic issues to political concerns. Thus, an ideology of progress in the creative world gradually gave way to an ethic of care.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".