Battles staged by : the development and organization of stage combat in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation traces the history and development of stage combat in Canada. The Canadian Theatre Agreement of 2002 recognized fight directors as professional theatre artists for the first time. However, the first recorded professional fight director in Canada was Douglas Campbell at the Stratford Festival in 1953. The fight director has been part of a long theatrical tradition that involves both artistic interpretation of dramatic texts and practical skills. To date there has not been a thorough investigation of the history of the fight director in Canada. Chapter One defines the role and function of the fight director and introduces the people interviewed as part of my research. In Chapter Two explores the origins of modern stage combat. Chapter Three concerns the roles that Douglas Campbell and Patrick Crean played in the establishment of professional stage combat in Canada through their involvement with the Stratford Festival. Chapters Four and Five explore the emergence of the two major Canadian fight associations and the training syllabi they created to properly train actor combatants. Through a series of interviews with professional Canadian fight directors, Chapter Six focuses on the role of the fight director as artist, dramaturg, instructor and choreographer, and analyzes their experiences staging fights for various Canadian productions of Hamlet. Chapter Seven explains the varying methods of fight notation instrumental in archiving a fight director's work for reference. Chapter Eight summarizes the role and function of the fight director in modern Canadian theatre. These elements are placed in context through personal interviews, newspaper articles, existing scholarship on stage combat and fencing, as well as current training methodologies used by Fight Directors Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".