Reimagining Shakespeare's Playhouse; Early Modern Staging Conventions in the Twentieth Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reimagining Shakespeare's Playhouse; Early Modern Staging Conventions in the Twentieth Century Joe Falocco D. S. Brewer, Woodbridge, 2010 50 [pounds sterling] (hb), viii + 208 ISBN 978184333842415 This is an important synoptic study drawing on a very extensive range of modern scholarship to evaluate the nature of some of the more significant attempts to reproduce some version of contemporary understandings of the nature of Renaissance stage conditions. As Falocco tackles William Poel, Harley Granville Barker, Nugent Monck, Tyrone Guthrie and Sam Wanamaker and The New Globe, his account of the various efforts and their ideological nuances is highly informative and well considered. His list of works cited alone takes up 13 pages in double columns. He is scrupulous in exploring his subjects both as their contemporaries saw their work and as later scholarship has contested it. Thus, for example, we get a useful analysis of whether Guthrie and Sam Wanamaker were indulging in quasi-colonial enterprises in Canada and England respectively. Similarly Poel and Barker are usefully considered in relationship to the economics of traditional Shakespearian staging and due weight is given to Nugent Monck, often an uninvited guest at this feast. Falocco apologises for not extending his invitation to Bernard Miles and George Murcell, who still await a full consideration of their own idiosyncratic contributions to what Falocco would not call the Shakespearean Revolution. He dislikes J. L. Styan's categorisation for eliding the differences between practitioners, but perhaps doesn't give him enough credit for his role in forwarding the investigation of the whole phenomenon. Although there is much to admire about this admirably researched study, there are some aspects that are less convincing than others. For example, Falocco does not give sustained consideration to what appears to me to have been one of the key factors in the complaints about managers like Beerbohm Tree, and Charles Kean: that their emphasis on spectacle was concomitant with a jettisoning of very hefty percentages of the original play and of reordering the sequence of scenes for the convenience of designers and stage crew. I do not think it is to privilege drama over theatre, or words over other theatrical signifiers, to argue that Harley Granville Barker's attempt to perform whole texts opened up possibilities for understanding Shakespeare's use of structure that were not readily accessible in the truncated versions of other practitioners. …
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".