Bibliographic record
Abstract
After Darwin, Timberlake Wertenbaker's play about the effect of Charles Darwin's theories of evolution on late-twentieth-century social assumptions and moral imperatives, opened 8 July 1998 at the Hampstead Theatre in London. Manuscript evidence shows, however, that Wertenbaker had been chewing on ideas about how cultural hybridity, gender roles, and recent political upheavals interact with Darwin's theories for more than a decade. In the late 1980s she wrote a play also titled "After Darwin," which is unpublished, unproduced, and previously undiscussed in criticism. Read together, the two plays are revelatory because though they are concerned with the same issues and conflicts, they are wildly different. An exploration of the relationship between the two plays — what differs and what survives in the evolution of Wertenbaker's texts — pinpoints the overall shift in Wertenbaker's work from an emphasis on gender to a focus on culture. Like the typescript, earlier plays in her oeuvre, notably New Anatomies (1981), Case to Answer (1980), and The Grace of Mary Traverse (1985) are propelled by gender analysis. Later plays like Our Country's Good (1988) and her most recent plays, After Darwin and Credible Witness (2001), probe colonialism and the interaction of cultures. This article compares Wertenbaker's 1998 After Darwin with the earlier typescript titled "After Darwin," and the comparison yields useful insight into Wertenbaker's changing worldview, as well as her development of structure, character, and theme.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".