MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Drama Theory, the Division of Knowledge, and the Emergence of the Aesthetic

2012· article· en· W1540353968 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Compass · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaMetaphorThe artsEntertainmentAestheticsRealismEpistemologyLiteratureArtPsychologyPhilosophyVisual artsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In The Secret History of Domesticity, Michael McKeon provides a new account of the development of the aesthetic in the eighteenth century. He characterizes the contribution of debates about neoclassical dramatic theory to the division of knowledge into the categories of science and art when they separate the pleasures of the understanding from the pleasures of the imagination. Unlike other accounts of the aesthetic that treat 18th‐century theatricality as a metaphor, McKeon’s use of drama theory mediates between metaphorical theatricality and literal theater history. By emphasizing the emergent epistemological divide between arts and science, however, McKeon does not fully exploit one of the consequences that may flow from giving this importance to drama theory: the location of aesthetics beside commerce or entertainment. To recognize the persistence of drama theory in literature even after the crystallization of the realist novel in the 1740s, moreover, might also generate an alternative history of the novel to the one provided in The Secret History.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it