MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093663872 · doi:10.1386/ijfs.9.3.395_1

Staging the/an Other: The Dragons' Trilogy Take II

2006· article· en· W2093663872 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jane Koustas

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Francophone Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrilogyLiminalityRepresentation (politics)HistoryImmigrationVisual artsLiteratureMedia studiesArtSociologyAestheticsArt historyPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies on the work of Robert Lepage underline the centrality of confrontation with the Other in the theatre of this internationally known and acclaimed Quebec dramaturge, cineaste, actor and producer. Characterized by the contact, collision and mixing of languages, Lepage's theatre challenges audiences around the world forcing them to experience the between zone, that liminal space between, or outside, comfortable linguistic, cultural and geographical boundaries in which the Other is frequently no longer easily identifiable. From early productions such as Circulations in the 1980s to his most recent production, The Andersen Project , staging the Other has been a central preoccupation of the Lepage project. However, as the recent remake of The Dragons' Trilogy suggests, perceptions of the Other may change over time as the Other's place in society evolves. This article provides an overview of Lepage's theatre with emphasis on the importance of language in the representation of the Other and focuses particularly on The Dragons' Trilogy . It suggests that what was intended, and indeed perceived, to be a sympathetic, albeit stereotyped, portrayal of the immigrant in Canada and Quebec in the 1980s appears as a misstep in a new millennium and in a new Quebec in which immigrants, including immigrant writers, have found their own voice.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Francophone StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207