A Postmodernist Reading of Tom Stoppard's Arcadia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tries to analyze the theories of postmodernist literature in Arcadia, a play by Tom Stoppard. Arcadia is a play that shares both modernist and postmodernist features. However, Stoppard's use of multiple perspectives, parodic echoing; seeming instability and, his mixing of theatrical and intellectual ideas lead some critics more confident to label the work postmodern. In postmodern theatre, nothing is absolute or eternal; nothing is exempt for skepticism and all meanings and values are historically conditioned. The way in which Stoppard's Arcadia may be seen as a postmodernist play is, perhaps, in using the criteria of how one responds to the intellectual uncertainty in the world. According to Wilde: Postmodernists are characterized by a willingness to live with uncertainty, to tolerate and, in some cases, to welcome a world seen as random and multiple, even, at times absurd (1987:44), and this is the way Arcadia's characters can be best described. In fact, with a combination of comedy and tragedy and the discussion of serious ideas involving different disciplines of art and science, using them as modes of representation in his mixing of past and present to show how the past affects the present and, how the present interprets the past, Stoppard's Arcadia, as a postmodernist dramatic achievement, is able to bring together a wide variety of literary and scientific notions in a postmodern world. Key Words: Arcadia; Postmodernist literature; grand narrative; pastiche; deconstruction; binary oppositions
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".