Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This article represents the first sustained critique of the work of contemporary American dramatist, Christopher Shinn. Beginning with an anecdote about the exclusion of one of Shinn's plays from a prospective new play anthology, apparently because he is not yet ‘canonical’ enough, the article begs questions about how dramatic canons are constituted and policed. Through an analysis of three selected plays – Where Do We Live (2002), Dying City (2006) , and Now or Later (2008) – the essay then argues for the distinctive political valency of Shinn’s work, reading it in particular through the work of contemporary philosopher Alain Badiou, and his thinking on both ethics and theatre. Shinn’s work, though clearly rooted in his experience as a gay man, functions to problematize familiar categorizations such as a gay/straight, liberal/conservative, West/East. Questions of difference and sameness are explored through the quotidian lives of Shinn’s characters, but also in relation to the major public events (9/11, the invasion of Iraq, the 2008 presidential election) to which the plays respond.
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 | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.076 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".