MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122832228 · doi:10.1353/tj.2015.0014

The Politics and Poetics of Contemporary English Tragedy by Sean Carney (review)

2015· article· en· W2122832228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ariel Watson

Bibliographic record

VenueTheatre Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsTragedy (event)PoliticsLiteratureRealismDramaNarrativeComedyHistoryArtLawPoetryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Politics and Poetics of Contemporary English Tragedy by Sean Carney Ariel Watson The Politics and Poetics of Contemporary English Tragedy. By Sean Carney. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013; pp. 360. It is hard to overstate the centrality of theatre to discourses of English national identity, or, for that matter, the ubiquity of the state-of-the-nation play in English drama as both a genre of composition and an interpretive convention. The innovation of Sean Carney’s new study of tragedy emerges from the relationship he draws between the various elements of his title: tragedy becomes the meeting ground of politics and poetics, form and history, the contemporary condition and the self-fashioning of Englishness. The tragic appears at the core of state-of-the-nation plays because it confronts and subverts the “empiricist discourse” of Englishness, “of common sense built upon a rigid binary logic of clear oppositions” (287). Ranging from the mid-century work of the English Stage Company to Jez Butterworth’s 2009 Jerusalem, this volume responds to John Orr’s argument that tragedy was largely absent in an era of British social realism. Carney’s complex stance on the tragic, echoing Raymond Williams, persuasively claims that modern British tragedy is not only widespread, but also a “hybrid birth” of the midcentury’s dual fascinations with realism and “formal theatricality” (7), situating his volume alongside the work of Dominic Shellard, Dan Rebellato, and Luc Gilleman in articulating new narratives and genealogies of nation and theatrical influence. Tragedy is, in Carney’s astute reply to Orr’s argument about the waning of the form, the crisis of necessity that is erased by the late capitalist rhetoric of boundless individualism and choice. Contemporary tragedy takes as its subject the loss of the tragic itself, “the peculiar and unique human experience in which loss and gain become, however fleetingly, indistinguishable from one another” (15). What is lacking is loss, and with it, access to the metaphysical. Tragedy forces a confrontation with loss, with the radically other in all its forms. This confrontation undermines the commonsense binary of Englishness by “asserting an identity of opposites between the material and the metaphysical, to infuse the profane with the sacred” (287). The dual structure to Carney’s argument is first organized around the gravitational pull of biography. Chapters trace the trajectory of the tragic mode in individual authors’ careers, carving out for each a distinctive relationship to loss and the metaphysical. The difficulty of this structure, however, is that distinctions between these authorial approaches to the tragic blur considerably over their long and varied careers, sometimes defying coherent ideological arcs or easy summary, and Carney astutely notes the convergences and variations that make this biographical structure so thorny. Thus his argument also traces a second, historical trajectory of tragic sensibility across the chapters: starting with the disintegration of postwar optimism and the failure of consensus, moving through a sense that socialist tragedy was becoming the tragedy of socialism to a sense during the 1980s that the tragic was the catastrophe of rampant capitalism, and culminating in the toxic emotional landscape of the 1990s, which were defined by a radical “repression of the other,” “disavowal of the unconscious itself,” and denial of the metaphysical (286). In the first chapter, Carney finds in the work of David Hare a problematic metatheatre of middle-class consciousness: “the middle-class self as a form of theatre, a constant repetition and re-enactment of one’s humanity,” striving for a chimerical authenticity (51). He also, however, identifies in it, particularly in the post-Thatcher plays, a striving toward the “affirmative tragic” of saintliness, an almost beatific attitude toward suffering and failure that defines many of his characters (40). Thus begins Carney’s persuasive charting of contemporary tragedy’s quest to confront the metaphysical without explicit recourse to discourses of transcendence. The next chapter, on Howard Barker’s “Theatre of Catastrophe,” continues this examination of “the necessity for spiritual gestures without the possibility of metaphysical fulfillment of said gestures” (70), identifying the metaphysical in Barker’s ecstatic confrontation with the unconscious, encountered in a crucible of pain. The next two chapters, on the tragedies of...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheatre JournalSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207