Exiled from Alienation: Brechtian Aesthetics, the Death of the Director, and Peter Brook's <i>The Mahabharata</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Certain to be counted among the many flashpoints in the cultural wars of the late 1980s, Peter Brook's The Mahabharata occupies a unique and ultimately illuminating position in the history of theatre and perfonnance criticism. Stained by the lingering residues of its producer's gross and well-documented cultural insensitivities, Brook's The Mahabharata became a kind of pariah shortly after its premier. That stain marks the history of the piece's reception and has resulted either in a consistent blurring of the production with its producer or in an implicit call to boycott the production as a way to hold Brook accountable for his indefensible behavior while in India researching his production. In either case, scholars have been unable or unwilling to move beyond considerations that are based on an equation of Brook's production with Peter Brook the person. While from a political standpoint such equations may initially be understandable, from a theoretical perspective they not only have been problematic from the very stat but also have inadvertently elided profoundly significant political ramifications in Brook's The Mahabharata, ramifications that become visible only if we make a clear break between Brook and his production.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 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".