Center or Margin: Revisions of the English Renaissance in Honor of Leeds Barroll
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IN THE INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER to his Politics, Plague and Shakespeare's Theater: Stuart Years (1991), Leeds Barroll lamented tendency of biographies of Shakespeare to reify presuppositions about causation, thereby resulting the freezing of number of available viewpoints that might otherwise be brought to bear (7). Barroll's call rereading of documents and rethinking of patterns of causation comes wake of Foucault's account of tactical polyvalence of discourses (1) and of range of theoretical positions that emphasized discontinuities, instabilities, and exclusionary forces that underpin operations of language. In process, Barroll revisited, and augmented, stock of those very documents that traditional (and even some revisionary) criticism has reduced to uniform reading. It is precisely this openness, combined with an undiminished appetite reinvestigation and reevaluation of what has hitherto passed fact and critical truth. that Lena Cowen Orlin's edited collection celebrates. It builds on what Barroll himself inveigled against when he spoke of sketching of historical figures making intelligent plans to implement intelligent decisions, experiencing consequences fully anticipated and hoped for (ibid., 12). Indeed, his initiation and indefatigable editing of major journals such as Shakespeare Studies, and Medieval and Renaissance Drama England, his founding of Shakespeare Association of America, his presence at its annual conferences, combined with regular appearance of his own further publications, all indicate an exemplary and continually adventurous intellectual energy. Meanwhile, impressively well-organized Shakespeare Association of America continues to provide major international focus Shakespeare Studies, and has sustained its mission to encourage and provide nurturing environment young scholars, while Shakespeare Studies continues to adventure beyond existing boundaries of discipline. Orlin's collection is an appropriate way to honor achievement of major Shakespeare scholar, but it is also testimony to those various avenues of critical and investigation that Barroll has been, large measure, responsible stimulating and encouraging. This collection is organized under four headings, representing consecutively, title of paper, graduate seminar theme, chapter title of one of Barroll's seminal books, and book title: England at Margins, Researching Renaissance, The Human Figure on Stage, and Artificial Persons. In some cases, as opening essay by Peter Stallybrass under heading England at Margins it was one of Barroll's own Shakespeare Association of America seminars (Montreal, 2000) that provided both occasion and stimulus. But others, essays appear to have been specially commissioned volume, and have been grouped under one of these four headings: each group testimony to prescience of Barroll's own published work, and to enduring challenge it continues to provide. Peter Stallybrass's Marginal England: View from aims to perform strategy familiar to readers of Barroll's writing: an adjustment of perspective, of kind that some recent examples of postcolonial criticism have taken much further to point of disturbing hegemonic foundations of post-Enlightenment historiography. Stallybrass does not quite go that far, since, following dialectic that he himself has been partly responsible making familiar, of relationship between marginality and symbolic centrality, his concern is with some of ways which the Mediterranean figured centrally English imaginary (29). textual spur his inquiry is hero's final speech Othello which suicide is figured as resolution of conflict in Aleppo once between a Malignant and Turband Turke and Venetian. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".