MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975413644 · doi:10.1353/pgn.0.0031

Saints and the Audience in Middle English Biblical Drama (review)

2008· article· en· W1975413644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rosemary Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenueParergon · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaSophisticationRhetorical questionLiteratureInterpretation (philosophy)RhetoricCharacter (mathematics)ArtSociologyMedia studiesHistoryAestheticsTheologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Saints and the Audience in Middle English Biblical Drama Rosemary Dunn Scoville, Chester N. , Saints and the Audience in Middle English Biblical Drama, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2004; cloth; pp.140 ; R.R.P. C$50.00; ISBN 0802089445. Our understanding of medieval drama has developed considerably in the last hundred years, and few would blithely dismiss such plays as simplistic fodder for the peasants. The artistic and theological sophistication has been acknowledged, but the academic interpretation has, at times, favoured the sinners over the saints, and has tended to see complexity and development of character in the subversive and interesting sinners. Chester Scoville sets out to argue, neatly and persuasively, that medieval drama incorporated rhetorical strategies to encourage the audience to respond positively to the good and negatively to the bad. In sum: 'This book argues that the techniques used by medieval playwrights to create characters were rhetorical in nature, that the central characters of the plays are the saints, the heroes and the virtuous; and that the function of these central characters was, as already discussed, to unite the community of the audience in its desire for holy living' (p. 7). By examining characters through these rhetorical strategies, Scoville raises interesting questions about the intention of the playwrights, and also about the intelligence of the audience who are not, in his view, simply told what to believe, but are encouraged to think through the emotional responses and are persuaded, not bludgeoned, into appreciating and therefore committing themselves to, the life of the good. The four characters he chooses are four saints: Thomas, Mary Magdalene, Joseph and Paul, who must all deal with the conflict of doubt and faith. [End Page 252] A re-evaluation of Thomas produces a reevaluation of the sophistication of the Towneley play and the interrelationship in the play of logos to ethos and pathos. Thomas as Doubter is the sceptic and rationalist, but his transformation to knower and believer is achieved, not just through empirical demonstration but also through the manipulation of the audience's evaluation of the value of logos. Logos, as represented in the Law of Paul, is shown as inadequate and Scoville argues that the characters, indeed, 'had to come painfully to grips with the inability of argument, logos or speech to convey belief in the resurrection' (p. 18). The play draws the audience through the inadequacy of pure logos, through faith (sensorial) and ethos (in the speeches) to a new understanding of knowledge itself which is embodied in the eloquent body of Christ rather than in the words. Thomas encapsulates the notion of transcending ethos and logos through pathos to develop a Christian rhetoric that is more responsive to the whole human. Mary Magdalene is viewed through the ethos of her physical appearance; her beauty is not merely a temptation to sin but an indication of her worthiness and of her as a vehicle of grace. Here beauty reflects De Doctrina Christiana's dictum that the role of rhetoric is to teach, to delight and to persuade. Mary speaks in a high style rhetorically, which verbally manifests her authority. The Digby Mary is not a prostitute but a lady who, as Apostle to the Apostles, speaks truth and that truth is reflected in her words. By contrast, the pagans' language descends into gobbledygook. Language and signs refer to far more than themselves. In the flawed, but repentant, eloquent and moving character of Mary, the audience has a figure not only 'to admire, imitate and follow, but also a bridge between themselves and the Church of the Apostles'. Joseph is a more shadowy character, who is introduced through rhetorical strategies, particularly pathos. Although often considered a comic character, Scoville describes a more complex figure who, through his words, actions and quiet but persistent faith, is a challenge to the viewers. They, confronted with the sceptical and all too human questions of Joseph, must query the strength of their own faith. As Joseph struggles with juridical understandings of righteousness, the rhetorical limitations of a purely human structure become apparent to the audience. Paul is both supreme rhetorician and, initially, sceptic. In the Digby play his roles are many; as...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParergonSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207