Offstage and Onstage Drama: New Approaches to Richard Brome. Facing Places in Richard Brome's The Weeding of Covent Garden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the beginning of The Weeding of Covent Garden , a builder and a potential homebuyer wax eloquent about the ongoing construction of Covent Garden, a piazza designed to rival any in Venice. Not only do these characters praise the Surveyor’s aesthetic purity, but they also speculate how social and economic betterment should ensue from such a massive urban project. Immediately following this exchange, they observe a woman dressed as a Venetian courtesan stepping onto her balcony, a woman who boldly proclaims her economic and sexual independence in pursuing a profession much prized in Italy. In this clash of values between Italian ‘high’ culture and its ‘low’ sexual mores, between masculine building and feminine selling, the body of architecture becomes curiously conflated with the female body as the garish spectacle of a painted courtesan is juxtaposed against a classical architectural facade. Drawing on the gender scheme ascribed to architecture by Inigo Jones, the Surveyor who planned the square, this paper explores how the crucible of Covent Garden, historical and imagined, reveals the tension between the importation of Continental architectural principles and the assimilation of ‘foreignness’ in gender roles, particularly within the new public sphere created by the piazza itself.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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".