MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2087968846 · doi:10.1353/mdr.2006.0011

Arthur Miller: A Critical Study (review)

2005· article· en· W2087968846 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffrey D. Mason

Notice bibliographique

RevueModern Drama · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMillerHistoryDramaScholarshipArt historyClassicsArtLiteratureLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Arthur Miller: A Critical Study Jeffrey D. Mason Christopher Bigsby . Arthur Miller: A Critical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Pp. 514. £19.99/ $29.99 (Pb); £60/ $85 (Hb). For over four decades, the core of Arthur Miller scholarship has consisted of a number of book-length studies entitled Arthur Miller (with occasional subtitles), each seeking to treat all of his plays to date, sometimes with commentary on his other writings. Authors have included Dennis Welland (1961, 1979, 1983. , and 1985), Sheila Huftel (1965), Edward Murray (1967), Leonard Moss (1967, 1980), Benjamin Nelson (1970), Ronald Hayman (1970, 1972), Neil Carson (1982), and June Schlueter and James K. Flanagan (1987). Others have covered Miller's oeuvre with edited collections of essays: Robert W. Corrigan (1969), James J. Martine (1979), Robert A. Martin (1982), Harold Bloom (1987), Steven R. Centola (1995), and Harold Bloom again (2000). Christopher Bigsby offers a new entry, eighteen years after Schlueter and Flanagan, and brings his own considerable work on Miller to a culmination, with the magisterial Arthur Miller: A Critical Study. Bigsby treated Miller in Confrontation and Commitment (1967), the second volume of A Critical Introduction to Twentieth-Century American Drama (1984), and Modern American Drama, 1945–2000 (2000), and he edited both Arthur Miller and Company (1990) and The Cambridge Companion to Arthur Miller (1997). In brief, Bigsby offers a close reading of every one of Miller's fictional works, ranging from the well-known and much-studied plays produced between 1947 and 1968 (All My Sons to The Price) to the short stories and unpublished early plays. He unpacks characters, story, action, and ideas, sometimes referring to choices in prominent productions and commenting on their critical reception. He organizes the material chronologically (following [End Page 609] the example of every one of the Miller studies mentioned above), interrupting the flow only to insert, at appropriate points, chapters on special topics: Miller's use of time and history in relation to the American experience, tragedy in Miller, the problem of creating literature in response to the Holocaust, and Miller as a Jewish writer. The through line is Miller himself. Bigsby becomes his virtual Boswell, explicating not the playwright's life (although including connecting narratives to trace his career from play to play) as much as his work and his working process. Whenever possible, Bigsby returns to unpublished drafts of the plays in order to explain Miller's choices, sifts through the playwright's notebooks, and cites Miller's own comments on shaping the material. Clearly, Bigsby sees the plays not as isolated phenomena but as the careful expressions of one man's developing sensibility, and that man's mind provides the connecting thread that gives a logic to the whole. Those who know Bigsby as an American studies scholar, as the author of works on Albee, Mamet, and many others, will not be surprised that he draws multiple connections between Miller and other writers. For example, the chapter on Death of a Salesman refers to Mark Twain's The Gilded Age, Theodore Dreiser's Sister Carrie, John Updike's Angstrom novels, Eugene O'Neill's The Iceman Cometh, Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire, William Inge's The Dark at the Top of the Stairs, David Mamet's Glengarry Glen Ross, William Faulkner's Light in August, Henry James, Erich Fromm's The Art of Loving, Benjamin Franklin, Horatio Alger, Jr., Friedrich Nietzsche, F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, Albert Camus, Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot and Krapp's Last Tape, and Miguel de Unamuno. Bigsby's approach suggests that we can best understand Miller's work by considering its relationships with other literature. Bigsby draws on impressive resources and on his ongoing contact with Miller himself (apparently initiated some time in the 1970s). He cites at least seven personal interviews with Miller, refers to unpublished texts held at the University of Michigan and the University of Texas at Austin, and quotes from typescripts of unpublished works that Miller made available to him (Resurrection Blues, Finishing the Picture, "The Turpentine Still," and the novel version of The Man Who Had All the Luck). Bigsby does not engage with the scholarly...

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,529
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,001

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 Opus0,080
Tête enseignante GPT0,346
Écart entre enseignants0,266 · 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

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
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueModern DramaMême sujetCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary ResearchTravaux en français237 207