MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053370759 · doi:10.3138/md.51.4.501

Resonating Bodies and the Poetics of Aurality; Or, Gertrude Stein's Theatre

2008· article· en· W2053370759 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Howard Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Drama · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortraitPerceptionDramaPoeticsModernism (music)Mode (computer interface)ArtAestheticsGazeVisual artsLiteraturePsychologyPoetryComputer sciencePsychoanalysisPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay considers theories of performance, modernism, and theatricality, as well as Gertrude Stein's critical writing, creative work, and correspondence on the topics of portraits, drama, staging, and theatre. By focusing on aurality and assuming Stein's plays anticipate the physical and temporal registers of theatre, we might understand the shift from her portraits to her plays as an exploration of how knowledge evolves from sensory perception to establish a relationship between producers and receivers of sounds. Her plays deploy voice as a means to accomplish what her portraits could not: the performance of embodiment. Performance becomes a mode of encounter, an aesthetic experience that involves perceptual engagement and transaction. Even as actors' bodies may stand in for voices, appearing to “embody” the voices conventionally, we gain access to entities only through the word-sounds they utter as a mosaic of fragments that elide referential signification. The implication of this mode, in terms of how we understand and conceive of embodiment, suggests that embodiment is a sensory experience defined by both absence and presence.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern DramaSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207