Mary I. Ingraham, Joseph K. So and Roy Moodley, eds Opera in a Multicultural World: Coloniality, Culture, Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Opera in a Multicultural World is a collection of essays that takes ‘multicultural representations of European operatic genres’ (1) in its purview. Edited by three Canadian scholars, Ingraham, So and Moodley, it forms part of the Routledge Research in Music series that approaches research on music from a variety of angles, including neuroscience, identity, film, gender, technology and popular music. Within opera studies more specifically, this book finds itself in the company of a burgeoning collection of publications that focuses on opera on the margins of mainstream composition and production. Such publications include Opera Indigene: Re/presenting First Nations and Indigenous Cultures (edited by Pamela Karantonis and Dylan Robinson, 2011), Blackness in Opera (edited by Naomi Andre, Karen Bryan, and Eric Saylor, 2012), and ‘New Voices in Black South African Opera’, in African Studies (convened by Naomi Andre, Donato Somma, and Innocentia Mhlambi, 2016). In fact, this edition of African Theatre adds to a field of scholarship where the focus moves to opera production on the periphery, investigating how opera might be re-imagined in contexts away from its Western centre and how (if at all) it talks back to that centre. The contributions in Opera in a Multicultural World predominantly explore the manifestation of the ‘racial other’ in canonic opera production and composition, with two chapters touching on the use of jazz as opera's ‘musical other’, in its composition. The former largely concerns the way in which members of communities other than white (Christian) Europeans – in this book pertaining mainly to African American, Jewish and Chinese characters – are represented in historical and contemporary opera, as well as reportage on the lived experiences of singers of colour in canonical opera performance. The way in which cultures other than European find their voices in the genre also receives some attention. Geographically and culturally, the book covers Europe, North America and China, and most examples come from the operatic canon from the late eighteenth and nineteenth century, with Wagner, as usual, receiving a large portion of attention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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".