MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011484748 · doi:10.3138/md.1054r

“You Can’t Be Here”: The Playwriting Dialectic in Ella Hickson’s <i>Oil</i>

2020· article· en· W3011484748 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Drama · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiterature Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialecticDramaturgyLiteratureHistoryArtPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Premiered at London’s Almeida Theatre in 2016, Ella Hickson’s play Oil uses an elongated time span to show the growth in global dependence on oil since the nineteenth century and to speculate on its future consequences. Hickson’s play is formally influenced by the disrupted-time plays of Caryl Churchill. The present article, however, makes the case for another playwriting influence: that of George Bernard Shaw, whose discussion plays Oil comes to resemble in its third and fourth parts. Adopting the language Shaw uses in his critical study The Quintessence of Ibsenism, the article argues that Oil stages, in its dramaturgy, a dialectical struggle between the Shavian and Churchillian traditions. Viewed in this light, Hickson’s next play, The Writer, can be read as a synthesis of Oil’s formal experimentation and the critical reaction to it.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.234 · 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