‘‘God’s in This Apple’’: Eating and Spirituality in Churchill’s <i>Light Shining in Buckinghamshire</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For authors influenced by feminist studies of the divided consciousness and its manifestation in eating disorders, the ways in which characters choose to interact with food has assumed vital importance. Their writings are often haunted by the presence or tangible absence of food, with its undertones of mixed longing and loathing. The rhythms of eating and not eating, feasting and fasting, fulfilment and renunciation, have become for many critics symbols of the internalization of patriarchy by women. Few writers, however, have treated the symbolic act of eating with as much complexity as Caryl Churchill. Her characters, both male and female, often eat onstage, and when hungry, discuss eating and food at great length. While recognizing the particular importance of food to women, Churchill's plays resist treating feasting or fasting as specifically gendered activities. Instead, her characters’ experiences of eating or starving are richly layered with social, political and spiritual significance. In her 1976 play Light Shining in Buckinghamshire, Churchill's careful portrayal of her characters’ literal need for nourishment poignantly reveals the economic disparity that allows some to feast while others hunger. Yet the importance of eating and starving within the play transcends the political realm, deriving spiritual significance from the characters’ attention to the Christian rituals of fasting and the Eucharist.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".