A Postmodernist Reading of Tom Stoppard's "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a postmodernist reading of Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Although both modern and postmodern tendencies are traceable in Stoppard's dramatic achievements, the present study strives to analyze some vivid postmodernist features in his most controversial play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, as a model of postmodernism in theatre. The selected play will be analyzed in accordance with the specific concepts and theories which are more apparent in Stoppard's dramatic achievements including Lyotard's theory of the end of meta-narratives and also the theory of language game, Fredric Jameson's consumer society, Jacques Derrida's deconstruction and Jean Baudrillard's simulation. As an example of postmodernist play, Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead seems to embody ambiguity, discontinuity, disintegration, pluralism, uncertainty and deconstruction, which are the most outstanding features of postmodern works. Thus, the researchers make an attempt to consider his dramatic work as an example of postmodernist theatre and to apply these postmodern theories to his Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.Key words: Deconstruction; Difference; Intertextuality; Language game; Meta-narratives; Postmodernism; Simulation
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".