Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the relationship between aesthetics and politics in documentary theatre. In contrast to approaches in both scholarly literature and artistic practice that assess the political significance of documentary theatre primarily in terms of content, the article discusses how the form of theatre itself can become political. I argue that Erwin Piscator’s post-war documentary theatre seeks, not only to intervene in political issues thematized in the productions, but also to claim a place for theatre as an institution uniquely capable of addressing two pressing questions of post-war politics: how to learn from the past and how to forestall future genocide. Piscator’s documentary productions relied on theatricality and aesthetic experience, offering a useful foil to current documentary theatre with its suspicion of theatricality. I base my argument on archival materials drawn from productions of plays, including The Burning Bush (New York Dramatic Workshop, 1949), The Crucible (Bühnen der Stadt Essen, 1958), The Investigation (Freie Volksbühne Berlin, 1965), and the pageant The Golden Doors (Madison Square Garden, 1943).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".