MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618943529 · doi:10.3138/md.0814

Strains of the Enlightenment: Making Belief in American Secularism and African Difference in <i>The Book of Mormon</i>

2017· article· en· W2618943529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kellen Hoxworth

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Drama · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheater, Performance, and Music History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularismRationalityEnlightenmentMusicalFeelingAestheticsAffect (linguistics)SociologyReligious studiesPhilosophyPsychologyGender studiesHistoryLiteratureIslamEpistemologyArtTheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article argues that the 2011 Broadway musical The Book of Mormon, best known for its parody of Mormon religious beliefs, uses what Sara Ahmed terms “affective economies” to paradoxically remake American beliefs in secular rationality. Whereas Richard Schechner posits a strict division between “make-believe” and “make-belief ” performances, The Book of Mormon demonstrates how the “make-believe” of Broadway makes beliefs and feelings in its audiences through circulations of affect. This article traces how such affects and beliefs are imbricated with national impressions about religious, racial, and sexual difference, particularly through the musical’s Mormon and black African characters. By attending to the musical’s impressions of Mormons and Africans, it deconstructs the musical’s tacit investments in American secularism and rationality through its circulation of “common sense” ideas about religious and racial others.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern DramaSame topicTheater, Performance, and Music HistoryFrench-language works237,207