A Slub in tne Cloth:<i>R.</i>v.<i>St. Clair</i>and the Pursuit of a «Clean Theatre» in Toronto, 1912–13
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper describes the 1912–13 case ofR.v.St. Clair, which concerned a Congregationalist minister's attempt to regulate the goings-on in a notorious burlesque theatre in Toronto. A “clean stage” was a goal of the moral reform movement of the time, and the criminal justice system was one of the avenues reformers took to attempt to achieve it. However, obscenity and indecency in theatres posed unique challenges. Two of the most important reasons were that under the influence of artistic and philosophical trends in the modern world, obscenity and indecency were becoming unstable concepts, and the nature, purpose and possibilities of art were being contested. TheSt. Claircase shows Toronto's legal apparatus grappling with these concerns at a time when the authority to judge and to decide what others might and might not view was slipping away from the Protestant churches and toward secular parties, including the courts. Ultimately the case suggests why the difficulties with censorship of verbal and visual representations may be an intractable dimension of our artistic, philosophical and legal position even now.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".