MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reading Shakespearean Violence

2007· article· en· W2097490892 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

VenueLiterature Compass · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaIdeologyHistoricismNew HistoricismLiteratureReading (process)PhrenologyFormalism (music)SociologyMaterialismAestheticsHistoryArtPoliticsEpistemologyPhilosophyLawLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This essay won the 2006 Literature Compass Graduate Essay Prize, Shakespeare Section. This article takes as its starting point some of ways in which the events of 9/11 have been integrated into recent critical studies of Shakespeare. These linkages between Shakespeare and 9/11 are a reminder that acts of violence are readily available access points at which to engage with Shakespeare's textual and theatrical manifestations; it is also apparent that broad and contentious issues coalesce around examinations of Shakespeare and violence: authorship, human agency, ideology, the historicizing and politicization of events and texts. With this in mind, it seems a suitable moment for retrospection, to survey prominent voices of the twentieth century in an effort to gain perspective and context for critical interrogations of Shakespeare and violence. This article aims to read critics reading Shakespearean violence in order to identify and examine influential approaches to Shakespeare as well as prominent theoretical modes – Formalism, New Historicism, Cultural Materialism – brought to bear on early modern drama generally.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.223 · 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