MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2973332899 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2019.0000

“More Aerial, More Graceful, More Perfect”: Madame Vestris’s Oberon, Victorian Culture, and the Feminized Fairies of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 1840–1914

2019· article· en· W2973332899 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marija Reiff

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian review · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDreamArtRomanceArt historyLiteraturePsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

“More Aerial, More Graceful, More Perfect”: Madame Vestris’s Oberon, Victorian Culture, and the Feminized Fairies of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 1840–1914 Marija Reiff (bio) In most modern productions of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Shakespeare’s king and queen of the fairies have a volatile, passionate relationship that is rooted in the sexual chemistry of two powerful figures colliding. This explosive dynamic is particularly alluded to in visual portrayals of Oberon, in which the king of the fairies is often teeming with masculine virility. Consider, for example, recent portrayals of the fairy king: from a bare-chested Rupert Everett in the 1999 movie version to a bare-chested John Light in the 2013 Globe production to a bare-chested David Harewood in Julie Taymor’s 2013 filmed staged version, Oberon is a warrior who is formidable, sexy, and abounding with machismo. Yet it was not always this way. From 1840 until 1914, with only a couple of minor exceptions, women always played Oberon (Williams 93). This trend was originated by Lucia Elizabeth Vestris in a highly influential production in 1840 at Covent Garden wherein she cast herself as the King of Shadows. Vestris, better known to her contemporaries as Madame Vestris, was an actress-turned-producer-and-manager who ran theatre companies at the Olympic and Covent Garden, and she was a bona fide celebrity of the Romantic and early-Victorian stage. Vestris’s portrayal proved influential, and for almost seventy-five years, no American or English production featured a man in the role (Norwood xvii). Vestris’s production is notable not only for instating the convention of all-female fairies but also for regenerating interest in Dream as a viable piece of live theatre. This change in precedent is particularly noteworthy as Dream is now one of the staples of repertory companies and Shakespearean festivals (Griffiths, Introduction 1). However, after the Restoration, in 1660, Shakespeare’s version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream fell out of popular favour, and it was performed only in fragments (Griffiths, “Neglected” 386). The reasons for its disappearance from the post-Restoration stage and its reinstatement in 1840 as a live theatrical piece filled with female fairies are directly related. In both instances, concerns about the viability of mortal humans playing non-mortal fairies ran rampant. Throughout the centuries, [End Page 251] fairies had become extensively romanticized, and it was impossible to stage Shakespeare’s full script with its faulty, flawed, and feuding fairies. However, with the proliferation of fairy extravaganzas in the 1830s and 1840s, especially as they contained abundant references to Shakespeare,1 producers found it imperative to return to Shakespeare’s original script. By making the fairies women, Vestris capitalized on the associations among women, children, and supernaturality, thus allowing her to portray idealized nineteenth-century fairies. Yet as these fairy portrayals became increasingly feminized, they also became progressively more childlike, pure, and naive. Though modern scholars are keen to see feminist undertones in Vestris’s production—for example, Elizabeth Schafer writes that “the production presented a very suggestive image of female power” and that it brought “traditional notions of femininity and masculinity . . . provocatively to the fore” (198, 199), and Gary Jay Williams adds that it “addressed the patriarchal Victorian culture in complex, fascinating ways” (93)—this enthusiasm is tempered by its contemporary reception. Throughout the Victorian and early Edwardian age, the fairies of A Midsummer Night’s Dream were the objects through which the era’s anxieties about innocence, idealism, passivity, and femininity were debated, and Vestris’s self-fashioned and gender-bending performance was indicative of the nineteenth-century impulse both to idealize and infantilize women. However, this valorization and patronization of Vestris’s Oberon was moderated by the history of the breeches role—an acting role wherein an actress wearing tight-fitting breeches played a man’s part—including Vestris’s personal history in breeches roles, to hint at the power and sexuality of Shakespeare’s fairy king. Vestris’s feminized Oberon thus showcased the contradictions and complexities of Victorian society regarding the display of the female body, and Vestris’s performance worked on two different and contradictory levels through capitulating to feminine idealization...

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)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,819
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,251
Écart entre enseignants0,237 · 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
GenreSynthèse

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

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian reviewMême sujetFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesTravaux en français237 207