Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Understanding Tony Kushner Robert Vorlicky James Fisher. Understanding Tony Kushner. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2008. Pp. 207. $39.95 (Hb). James Fisher is one of Tony Kushner’s most prolific critics. His notable Theater of Tony Kushner: Living Past Hope was preceded and followed by numerous essays, production reviews, and edited collections focusing on Kushner. Fisher was named “Indiana Theatre Person of the Year” by the Indiana Theatre Association in 1997 for his direction of Angels in America, Part One: Millennium Approaches at Wabash College. Most recently, Fisher published his edited collection, “We Will Be Citizens”: New Essays on Gay and Lesbian Drama, which includes his own essay [End Page 373] on the mainstreaming of gay drama vis-à-vis the unparalleled success of Angels. Fisher finds in the Understanding Contemporary American Literature series at the University of South Carolina Press an opportunity to reach both a broader audience and to speak more broadly about Kushner than in previous publications. The series, founded in 1985 by general editor Matthew J. Bruccoli (who died last year after shepherding close to fifty titles to publication), states that its mission is to provide instruction in how to read certain contemporary writers – identifying and explicating their material, themes, use of language, point of view, structures, symbolism, and responses to experience . . . Although the criticism and analysis in the series have been aimed at a level of general accessibility, these introductory volumes are meant to be applied in conjunction with the works they cover. (vii) Responding to this mission, the book’s opening chapter identifies phrases and ideas that strive to capture the essence of Kushner’s artistry. In the next four chapters – discussing A Bright Room Called Day (1985), Hydriotaphia, or The Death of Dr. Browne (1986), Angels in America (1991–92), Homebody/Kabul (2001), and Caroline, or Change (2003) – Fisher repeats these phrases and ideas throughout. The result links compositions together but inadequately explores the ways in which the writings function independently of one another. His methodology, too, seems to stem from the series’ commitment to “instruct” readers on how to read Kushner in order to understand resonances between his texts. References to “American lyric realism” (especially in the hands of Tennessee Williams) and “Brechtian technique,” for example, appear as the essential lenses through which to appreciate Kushner’s plays. While these influences are unquestionable (and are indeed instructional in “understanding Kushner”), their application from play to play – at the expense of other critical, theoretical perspectives – tends to dilute the intricate layering of Kushner’s techniques, themes, tropes, and theatricalities. Yet the book is filled with many striking moments, particularly when the critic engages the originality, authority, and sheer brilliance of Kushner’s accomplishments. For example, Fisher reminds us of the indisputable significance of Angels: the play seized the conscience of a nation unravelling the connections among individual, community, and national identities amid the AIDS crisis. From Fisher’s perspective, Angels is the creation of an artist who lived truthfully and fully at the present moment of his culture’s pulsating centre. A decade later, as Fisher acknowledges, the artist tackled the timely crises of international tensions in Homebody/Kabul, which presents, in dramatic form, a less coherent, colliding chain reaction among global, national, community, and individual identities. Fisher is [End Page 374] generous in letting the playwright speak in his own words, as in the pause for reflection between his discussions of the two plays. America must, as Kushner puts it, “behave justly with the rest of the world” (71). “If we do that,” he goes on, “if we can tackle the question of our place in the world, we can begin the new century in a spirit of transformation and justice” (71). Positioning Kushner between and of two worlds – artist and citizen – allows the critic to address the driving forces and undeterred quests of Kushner the playwright and the man. Fisher brings to his analyses an invaluable knowledge of Kushner’s unpublished texts, knowledge that highlights connections rarely noted in previous studies. (I look forward to a future study that looks even more closely at the earliest of Kushner’s writings, including The Age of Assassins [1982], The Protozoa...
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,056 | 0,021 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».