Writing on the Walls: Reimagining Eugène Ionesco’s Rhinoceros
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This artist’s statement is a critical reflection on the creative process that culminated in the staging of Eugene Ionesco’s play Rhinoceros at the University of Calgary’s Reeve Theatre from November 30th to December 8th, 2019. The first chapter introduces my initial ideas and approaches to the production at the beginnings of my research, and how these ideas evolved based on my experience(s) in Greece. The second chapter contextualizes the play within my research, including Eugène Ionesco’s body of work, the contemporary social, political, and cultural framework that informed the reconceptualization, specifically Greece’s debt crisis and the resultant unrest evident in Athens’ graffiti and protest-turned-riots. The third chapter focuses on revisions, additions, and reinterpretations of the text that manifested in the production. The fourth chapter outlines the collaborative process with designers, actors, and academics moving from rehearsal to performance. The final chapter reflects on the successes, failures, lessons, and thoughts following the performance run with regard to my intended outcome for the play. In adherence to departmental guidelines the names of all undergraduate student artists involved in the creative process have been omitted from the document and are instead referred to by their title within the production, i.e., lighting designer, stage manager, etc.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".