MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622851389

Lloyd Richards in rehearsal

2013· dissertation· en· W2622851389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Everett Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStanislavski's systemPerformance artAction (physics)Order (exchange)Art historyArtHumanitiesVisual artsCartographyHistorySociologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"This dissertation analyzes the rehearsal process of Caribbean-Canadian-American director Lloyd Richards (1919-2006), drawing on fifty original interviews conducted with Richards' artistic colleagues from all periods of his directing career, as well as on archival materials such as video-recordings, print and recorded interviews, performance reviews and unpublished letters and workshop notes. In order to frame this analysis, the dissertation will use Russian directing concepts of character, event and action to show how African American theatre traditions can be reformulated as directing strategies, thus suggesting the existence of a particularly African American directing methodology. The main analytical tool of the dissertation will be Stanislavsky's concept of "super-super-objective," translated here as "larger thematic action," understood as an aesthetic ideal formulated as a call to action. The ultimate goal of the dissertation will be to come to an approximate formulation of Richards' "larger thematic action." Some of the artists interviewed are: Michael Schultz, Douglas Turner Ward, Woodie King, Jr., Dwight Andrews, Stephen Henderson, Thomas Richards, Scott Richards, James Earl Jones, Charles S. Dutton, Courtney B. Vance, Michele Shay, Ella Joyce, and 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 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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.145 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207