MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1994818818 · doi:10.1353/boc.0.0024

Conscience on Stage: The Comedia as Casuistry in Early Modern Spain (review)

2009· article· en· W1994818818 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frederick A. de Armas

Notice bibliographique

RevueBulletin of the Comediantes · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueEarly Modern Spanish Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCasuistryConscienceMoralitySubject (documents)ExorcismPhilosophyArtLiteratureTheologyEpistemology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Conscience on Stage: The Comedia as Casuistry in Early Modern Spain Frederick A. De Armas Kallendorf, Hilaire. Conscience on Stage: The Comedia as Casuistry in Early Modern Spain. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007. 299 pp. Hilaire Kallendorf, in a fascinating critical move, has turned from exorcism to casuistry. In her earlier book, Exorcism and Its Texts (Toronto, 2003), Kallendorf showed that, because the devil was thought to be able to enter bodily organs and infect the memory, the imagination, and even the seat of reason, possession could threaten notions of selfhood. Now, she evinces the instability of this selfhood as it is faced with "case morality." Very much like exorcisms that detached devilish forces from the self, casuistry serves to calm moral qualms, or perhaps it exacerbates them. In Conscience on Stage, Kallendorf connects answers concerning case morality given by confessors to the ethical dilemmas faced by characters in the Spanish comedia. Her book begins with a learned and very useful overview of the history of casuistry, which shows how Spanish Jesuits in early modern Spain brought the practice to its heights. Professorships on the subject became common as sermons discussed the many issues involved; books on the subject were published in Latin and in the vernacular. Sermons and speeches were given, often taking a dialogic and even theatrical format. After all, casuistry moved from general moral principles to specific circumstances. The devil was in the details, and participants at a lecture were given the opportunity to present different resolutions and extenuating circumstances. Kallendorf asserts, "Any situation involving choice among various options could invoke the principles of casuistry to prioritize levels of virtue and vice as they appeared relative to one another" (11). Indeed, she shows how plays written and performed in Jesuit schools may have been the impetus for the uses of casuistry on the secular Spanish stage; after all, schools were performing plays long before Lope de Vega burst upon the scene. Kallendorf also point out that a number of playwrights had studied with the Jesuits in their youth and that many became priests in later life. They would thus be most familiar with the Jesuit vision of theater as pulpit. [End Page 141] Having demonstrated how casuistry is possibly a key factor in the mindset of playwrights, Kallendorf sets out to prove her case, to show that "cases of conscience" were central to early modern drama. First, she shows how the term "case" pervades the vocabulary of these plays. Cases are constructed and verified; the language of fault and blame is ever-present; and the question of what to do is often asked, as well as the question of what the punishment should be. She argues that term acaso is used when guilt is only postulated; ocasión is interpreted as the occasion for sin, etc. From the analysis of language, Kallendorf concludes that "we might see words like caso, intento or ocasión as present marks of an absent confessor, the phantasm who hovers over the comedia text … many casuistical speeches in the comedias are introduced by a single hallmark question: 'What should I do?'" (63). Although one might argue that ocasión is a term of classical provenance and of visual impact, because it is the subject of a number of emblems, this does not mean that it cannot also contain a casuistic valance. No matter how appealing Kallendorf's approach might be, we must be careful not to use it indiscriminately and reduce terms to narrow meanings. Kallendorf's discussion of the term "What to do?" is particularly engaging. Here, she looks at moral dilemmas and conflicting duties, to hierarchies of virtue and vice, to the double bind, and to recognition and confession. Memorable characters from the comedias, from Catalinón to Sancho Ortiz, and from Rosaura to Mencía, show their concern for these important issues, and Kallendorf makes a strong case for their casuistic link. The question "What to do?" even surfaces when characters ask it of honor, of fate, of the heavens, and of demons (123-27). Other important insights surface in this clearly-written and well-structured book, such as the degree of culpability in Casandra's...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,586
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,210 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBulletin of the ComediantesMême sujetEarly Modern Spanish LiteratureTravaux en français237 207