MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416015419 · doi:10.1057/9781137027313_5

‘Animal Spirits are Everything!’: Robinson Crusoe Pantomimes and the Child of Nostalgia

2012· book-chapter· en· W2416015419 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew O’Malley

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTravel Writing and Literature
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaHEROLiteratureSensibilityArtIndividualismRealismComedyHistoryArt historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The song ‘Robinson Crusoe’ began appearing quite regularly in such popular print media as garland chapbooks and broadsheets at about the same time that Crusoe began appearing on the popular stage. Indeed so reliable a source as Iona and Peter Opie suggest, as noted in Chapter 3, the song and the stage show have a shared history. Robinson Crusoe made his theatrical debut in a Richard Sheridan pantomime first performed at the Theatre Royal in 1781, which quickly became one of the most regularly-staged afterpieces of the late eighteenth century.1 Taking the stage after the evening’s main drama or comedy, Robinson Crusoe was a musically-accompanied dumb-show with elaborate set designs depicting the novel’s principal events and ending with pantomime’s conventional ‘transformation scene’ and harlequinade. In the words of the author of a contemporary account of the performance: ‘Friday, being invested with the powers of Harlequin, after many fanciful bistresses [sic], and the usual pantomimical revolutions, receives the final reward in the hand of Columbine’ (A Short Account 20). Striking, perhaps, to modern readers of Defoe’s novel is the fact that Friday, rather than the protagonist Crusoe, should be transformed into the pantomime hero Harlequin. More striking, to those familiar with its twentieth-century critical reception, is that the work Ian Watt identified as setting the novelistic standards for ‘formal realism’ and as capturing the modern sensibility of individualism should be recast into a form whose conventions were already so standardized and familiar that they could be sufficiently captured for late eighteenth-century readers with the phrase ‘usual pantomimical revolutions.’2

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicTravel Writing and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207