Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Shakespeare and the Performance of Girlhood by Deanne Williams Laura Schechter Deanne Williams. Shakespeare and the Performance of Girlhood. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 296 pp. $105. In her new book Deanne Williams helps to amend the traditional belief that medieval and early modern English families placed little value on girls. Indeed, while girls were certainly victimized within early modern patriarchal social structures, many enjoyed affectionate relationships with their kin. Girls were also productive, necessary members of domestic economies and, at times, at least minimally educated. More specifically, Williams corrects what seems to be an unbelievable omission: a total lack of lengthy academic studies on girlhood in William Shakespeare’s plays. Although billed as a book on Shakespeare, half of Williams’s work here draws connections to other early modern professional playwrights and, importantly, girls who wrote pieces for performance, placing Shakespeare’s work within a broader early modern conversation. [End Page 237] Although she insists on the unique place of girls in early modern theatre culture, Williams provocatively suggests expanding “the figure of the girl and the subject of girlhood” in order to make both “relevant beyond the limits of gender as well as age, accessible to boys and men,” all the while preserving a sense of girlhood as a special identity for women, an identity that need not be considered temporary and that need not be forsaken as part of a healthy development into adulthood (14). Even as Williams marks out a space for the girl as special and worthy of consideration, she productively suggests that the flexible connotations of the term allow for a range of readings in dramatic work. Importantly, Williams draws attention to the sixteenth century as a period in which “girl” began to refer solely to a female child. During the medieval period, “girl” could be used to describe a child of either sex. The term could imply the expected qualities of sweetness and innocence in an early modern female child, but it also carried connotations of eroticization and sex work, a point confirmed by contemporary dictionaries and their inclusion of terms such as “harlot” and “trull” as synonyms for “girl” (5). Shakespeare’s plays appeared at a moment when the gendered identity attached to girls was in flux, especially given the early modern practice of having boy actors play girls’ and women’s roles. Working with the plasticity in the term “girl” encourages a more complicated understanding of Shakespeare’s characters, however. Take Joan of Arc’s position in Henry VI, Part 1, for example: Joan la Pucelle (pucelle another term that simultaneously carries connotations of innocence and experience) is given the moniker “girl” at two points in the play. One of the references to the character as a “girl” can be found as York and Warwick debate the merits of Joan’s pregnancy claim, a conversation that supports Williams’s sense of the term as both virginal and sexualized for the early modern mind (24). A consideration of this sexual duality and the gendered uncertainty inherent in the word “girl” allows for a broader, more engaging reading of the often androgynous Joan’s relationship to men and to larger structures of authority. Shakespeare includes the term approximately sixty-eight times across his various works, usually in moments “when a character’s relationship to authority is complicated or troubled,” according to Williams, who sees the playwright’s use of “girl” shift within larger changes in his social milieu (3, 4). In her initial discussion of Shakespearean texts, Williams attaches keywords to specific girl characters, the keywords also selected from each respective play. Silvia is “perverse” in The Two Gentlemen of Verona, while The Taming of the Shrew’s Kate is “froward,” and Romeo and Juliet ’s heroine [End Page 238] is “wayward” (43). All three terms are associated with religious disruption and upheaval, a point that Williams opens up in somewhat limited ways. Most exciting in her work on Shakespeare is Williams’s discussion of Richard II’s Isabelle de France. Generally staged as an adult woman, despite the fact that the historical figure was a child who married at seven, Isabelle has overwhelmingly been treated by critics as...
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 | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,023 | 0,008 |
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 ».