MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W181323954

Dramatic Arenas for Ethical Stories. (Reflections on Feminist Critical Practices)

2002· article· en· W181323954 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kathleen Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueResources for feminist research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaSociologyFeminismNothingEthnographyAestheticsArtGender studiesHumanitiesArt historyVisual artsPhilosophyAnthropologyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this discussion paper, the author weaves a thread between three kinds of feminist critical projects: theatre, education, and research. Using feminist performances of plays, ethnographic research, and pedagogical spaces in drama classrooms, the paper explores the terrain of the re-imagined by challenging existing aesthetic and discursive representations of self/other on the stage and in the everyday. Dans ce document de discussion, l'auteure relie trois sortes de projets feministes critiques: le theatre, l'education et la recherche. En employant la mise en scene de pieces de theatre, la recherche ethnographique et 'espace pedagogique utilise dans les salles de classes de theatre, 'article sonde le terrain de ce qui est re-imagine en mettant en cause la representation discursive et esthetique actuelle de soi et de 'autre tel quil parait sur scene et au quotidien. ********** In his sixth letter to who dare teach, Paulo Freire (1998) claimed that ethics and aesthetics are intimately tied together. I would like to make a start from his claim in this short discussion paper, and reflect upon three kinds of feminist critical projects: theatre, education, and research. A feminist approach to anything, says Gayle Austin (1998), paying attention to women It means paying attention when women appear as characters and noticing when they do not. It means making some invisible' mechanism visible and pointing out, when necessary, that while the emperor has no clothes, the empress has no body. It means paying attention to women as writers and as readers or audience members. It means taking nothing for granted because the things we take for granted are usually those that were constructed from the most powerful point of view in the culture and that is not the point of view of women. (Austin, p.136) My world inhabits the domains of theatre, of education, and of research and these arenas inform one another in very specific ways. Drama education in the lives of young women has been central to my conceptions of inquiry and research for several years, that is, the possibilities afforded girls when they construct realities through dramatic roleplay. In the summer of 2000, at Ohio State University, I had the distinct pleasure of engaging with Patti Lather's feminist ethnographic research of women living with HIV/AIDS (a collaboration with feminist psychologist Chris Smithies), as respondent to her keynote address made to the International Drama in Education Research Institute. The enabling crossroads of research, praxis, and aesthetic experimentation have occupied me since that time. Playwriting and Other Narratives Aphra Behn (1640-1689), it is said, was the first woman to earn her living as a writer, the first woman to insist upon a literary identity of her own and cast aside the claim that she merely scribbled to amuse herself in private hours (Goreau, 1980). The fops, critics, and writers did not, at first, know what to make of this She-author. As a real character, then, she makes an interesting subject for Canadian feminist playwright Beth Herst. Herst first workshopped her play, A Woman's Comedy, on the life and artistic contributions of Aphra Behn in 1991. It was nearly impossible, in seventeenth-century London, to earn a living as a woman writer operating without a pseudonym, but to speak a reality unwelcome by most, a reality that was antagonistic to dominant views of social life was a particular hazard for Behn. In the following exchange from Herst's play, her dear friend, actress Betty Lacy, tries to persuade Aphra to give the audience what they want and not some other version of truth: Betty: He'll read it, you know. But he won't put it on. Aphra: You don't think it's any good. Betty: Of course it's good. That's not the point. Aphra: He helped me before. Betty: And he will again, as best he can. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.055
Scholarly communication0.0170.018
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0080.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.355
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.122 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResources for feminist researchSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207