MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2436267325 · doi:10.1353/mrw.2016.0011

Magical Transformations on the Early Modern English Stage ed. by Lisa Hopkins, Helen Ostovich

2016· article· en· W2436267325 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deborah Lea

Notice bibliographique

RevueMagic, ritual, and witchcraft · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMAGIC (telescope)DramaFAUSTWitchLiteratureEntertainmentPoliticsArtArt historyHistoryVisual artsLawPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Magical Transformations on the Early Modern English Stage ed. by Lisa Hopkins, Helen Ostovich Deborah Lea Lisa Hopkins and Helen Ostovich, eds. Magical Transformations on the Early Modern English Stage. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Farnham UK and Burlington Vt: Ashgate, 2014. xi + 278 pp. From an early age, we are introduced to witches and magic upon the stage—from the first time we boo the wicked witch in Cinderella, or applaud the pumpkin’s transformation. Working on magic in the early modern era we become conversant with magic beyond the fairy tale: Macbeth’s three hags, Faust and his pact, and Prospero’s magical meddling. At first glance, the inclusion of magic upon the stage may seem merely a means to provide entertainment and excitement, or touch of the sinister and a shiver up the spine. Magic upon the stage, however, is part of a wider discourse, enabling commentary upon religion, politics, and cultural stereotypes (to name but a few). Ostovich and Hopkins’s collection deftly illustrates the latter point, providing an illuminating analysis of theatrical representations of magic, from such renowned portrayals as Doctor Faustus, to the less familiar, like The Late Lancashire Witches. This collection is especially concerned with the issue of transformation, as the introduction states, “plays themselves can be and often are, [End Page 141] agents of transformation in that they challenge perceptions and assumptions more often than they reinforce them” (15). With this as its missive the collection successfully establishes how such plays, as part of a wider discourse, tackled a host of issues. Moreover, the various portrayals discussed also indicate that perspectives about witchcraft and magic themselves were subject to transformation. In order to achieve its aim the collection is divided into four sections with each segment tackling a diverse array of texts and subjects. The first, “Demons and Pacts,” focuses upon the encounter at the heart of the early modern understanding witchcraft, the demonic pact. Barbara Traister’s article applies Keith Thomas’s renowned thesis to the stage. With Dr Faustus, Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay, and The Witch of Edmonton as her exemplars, Traister convincingly argues that the period 1590 to 1620 witnessed a decline in the seriousness and status of demonic magic upon the stage, paralleling that discernible in the wider culture. Faust is also the facilitator for Bronwyn Johnston’s essay, which adopts the interesting stance of perceiving the pact as “an issue of contract law as much as it is theological concern” (33). For Laura Levine, words themselves are the subject of consideration. Levine examines the debate discernible in Faust regarding the extent to which words can be said to have a “performative power”; can language really effect magic and instigate action? Levine argues that the play raises questions relevant to wider contemporary deliberations regarding magic. Intertwining in their choice of text and theme, these three articles skilfully demonstrate that performance of the pact upon stage was part of a far wider discourse. “Rites to Believe” addresses the matter of magic’s ability to symbolize issues beyond itself; often, though not exclusively, acting as a signifier for religious issues. In this section it is the “Scottish play” that becomes the focus of attention, featuring in both Alisa Manninen’s and Verena Theile’s contributions. The former arguing that the portrayal of the witches and their rituals serve to create a pervasive, malign influence. Moreover, that the witches’ maleficent rituals both contrast with and undermine social rituals. Theile’s reading, which opens with a captivating premise comparing Macbeth with the de Palma classic The Untouchables, compellingly interprets the witches as a “representational presence” for evil, rather than a provocation of it. For Theile, the witches’ presence makes Macbeth (in whom the human capacity for evil is made manifest) more tolerable for the audience. Jil Del-singe takes a different text as her focus, A Winters’ Tale. Delsinge’s incisive reading of Hermione’s apparently miraculous restoration exhibits one of the themes of this work, magic’s representative malleability. Magic, which in this instance is suggestive of a valediction of the Catholic perspective, could be [End Page 142] capable of acting as a vehicle for a...

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 consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,484
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 technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,213
Écart entre enseignants0,199 · 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
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMagic, ritual, and witchcraftMême sujetFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesTravaux en français237 207