MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023700891 · doi:10.3138/md.45.4.519

Removing the Veils: Censorship, Female Sexuality, and Oscar Wilde's <i>Salome</i>

2002· article· en· W2023700891 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mathew Lewsadder

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Drama · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensorshipArtPulpitAestheticismVulgarityPerformance artLiteratureHuman sexualityArt historyLawVisual artsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In studies of Oscar Wilde's play Salome, it is de rigueur to note that the play was refused a license for production in 1892 because it violated the ban of plays based upon biblical subjects. Continuing this account, we might recall Wilde's empty threat that he would move to France if the play was not licensed and the English press's titillation at the prospect of Wilde being subject to military service as a French citizen. We might also rehearse Wilde's indignant self-defense through aestheticism. Accusing the Examiner of Plays, Edward F.S. Pigott, of "pander[ing] to the vulgarity and hypocrisy of the English people", Wilde righteously smoldered at Pigott's philistinism… Undoubtedly, such observations make interesting footnotes and engaging openings to essays; having participated in this wonted citation of the more piquant moments in the initial censorship of Salome, I would like to consider at length the salacity of Salome herself and the even more scandalous history of the play's censorship from 1892 to 1931.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.222
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
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern DramaSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207