MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085239832 · doi:10.1093/jahist/jas017

Changed for Good: A Feminist History of the Broadway Musical

2012· article· en· W2085239832 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheater, Performance, and Music History
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusicalSingingPeriod (music)Representation (politics)Human sexualityIdeologyPoliticsArtGender studiesHistorySociologyAestheticsLiteratureVisual artsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stacy Wolf’s Changed for Good is a carefully researched, elegantly written, and methodologically innovative feminist analysis of Broadway musicals from the 1950s to the early twenty-first century. Where Wolf’s previous monograph, A Problem like Maria: Gender and Sexuality in the American Musical (2002), focused specifically on the careers and performances of four celebrated Broadway stars from the 1950s and early 1960s, Changed for Good emphasizes how musicals have contributed to, and in some cases even provoked, discussions about the role of women in American society over a sixty-year period. As Wolf explains, Changed for Good looks at and listens to the different ways that women actors and female characters interact with all aspects of the performance, from singing together in duets to dancing alone center stage, from participating in a community’s formation to becoming a cog in the theatrical machinery. (p. 6) Each chapter examines a small cluster of musicals from a single decade that together reflect major changes in the social, political, and cultural representation of women. Rather than discuss all aspects of the performance in every chapter, Wolf wisely builds her chapters around the analysis of a single musical convention. So, for example, in the first chapter, “The 1950s: ‘Marry the Man Today,’” Wolf looks at three different examples of female duets from Guys and Dolls (1950), Wonderful Town (1953), and West Side Story (1957) to suggest that the aural and visual effects created by two women singing together onstage may have undermined the otherwise dominant heterosexual/sexist ideology that characterized most musicals of the period. Later, in “The 1980s: ‘The Phantom of the Opera Is There inside My Mind,’” Wolf brilliantly demonstrates how the emphasis on huge scenic effects in megamusicals such as Les Miserables (1985) and Phantom of the Opera (1986) literally and figuratively diminished the female body onstage, a scenographic effect that she sees as another example of the 1980s backlash against the advances of 1970s feminism.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.177 · 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