Peter Pan's Shadows in the Literary Imagination
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PETER PAN'S SHADOWS IN THE LITERARY IMAGINATION. Kirsten Stirling. New York: Routledge, 2012. 188 pp. 9780415888646. $125.00. PETER PAN'S SHADOWS IN THE LITERARY IMAGINATION, Kirsten Stirling's study of literary legacy of J. M. Barrie's Pan, came about, according to author, as a result of teaching play Pan in a first-year seminar at University of Lausanne. Stirling acknowledges in her introduction that it is not her intent to give a complete critical history of Pan, that her focus is beginnings and endings, sources and sequels (5), and her intent is to explore ambiguities in Barrie's play that have invited later writers to fill in gaps at either end of story and provide interpretations of their own (5). While Stirling accomplishes her goal to focus on beginnings and endings, sources, prequels, and sequels, a lack of overt connection between discussions in individual chapters at times obscures through-line of her argument. Chapter One traces textual origins of Barrie's play, addressing emphasis on authorship and storytelling that Barrie employs in many versions of story of Pan. From its beginnings as a part of storytelling in novel The Little White Bird (1902)--later published as Pan in Kensington Gardens--and adventures with vacationing Llewellyn Davies family recounted in The Boy Castaways (1901) through its long stage history and novelization of 1911 to final published play of 1928, Barrie emphasized communal nature of story's authorship, even going so far as to deny memory of having authored it in his introduction to published version. Storytelling, as Stirling points out, is at core of work in all its forms, as a series of characters tell each other stories for various reasons and with various motivations, some benign but many dangerous to point of deadliness. Chapter Two considers origins of Pan in rich theatrical tradition of English pantomime, as Pan long remained a staple of Christmas season in London, competing for its audiences with popular Christmas pantomimes. Stirling deals with extensive textual changes that occurred over years of writing and productions as Barrie toyed with and largely rejected pantomime possibilities in story of Pan. Stirling further notes pantomime qualities that remain: echo of skin parts in dog-nurse Nana, traditional use of an actress to play Peter, Captain Hook as an exaggerated pantomime villain (29), and employment of audience participation in scene where children are asked to clap in order to save life of Tinker Bell. Stirling goes on to discuss significant ways in which Pan deviates from pantomime tradition, primarily in its complex ambiguities regarding nature and even identity of its protagonist; its themes of love, life, death, and maturity; and even its function as a play for a mixed audience of children and adults. Chapter Three deals with what Stirling calls the opposed fantasies of and (63) as two main characters vie for role of protagonist and clash over their competing desires for domestic, adult bliss and eternal youthful adventure. Here author deals with uneasy sexuality inherent in Barrie's text--and in critical commentary on it--noting that while Pan is irresistible material for psychoanalytic criticism, as is life of Barrie himself, attempts to impose a Freudian Oedipal on Pan tend to be problematic largely because relationships in play defy these easy designations (47). However, Stirling also notes that a reading of Neverland as unconscious reveals disturbing elements, including a deep-seated fear of female sexuality which underlies irreconcilable trajectories of Wendy and Peter (47). While this chapter may be too brief to truly deal with issues it raises--issues which are at core of Barrie's complex and ambiguous treatment of themes of love and sex, life and death--Stirling does a credible job of at least presenting questions to be answered and acknowledging scholarship of those who have gone before her in Barrie studies. …
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it