Don Quijote como personaje dramático en el teatro español de los siglos XVIII y XIX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEn este trabajo analizo la construccion dramatica del personaje de don Quijote en siete piezas, cuatro del siglo XVIII: el Fin de fiesta del juego de la sortija(1718), anonimo; El Alcides de la Mancha y famoso don Quijote(1750), de Rafael Bustos Molina; Las bodas de Camacho el Rico(1784), de Juan Melendez Valdes y El amor hace milagros(1784), de Pedro Benito Gomez Labrador; y otras tres del siglo XIX: Don Quijote de la Mancha resucitado en Italia(1805), anonima; Don Quijote de la Mancha en Sierra Morena(1832), de Ventura de la Vega (retomada en 1861 como Don Quijote de la Mancha) y Don Quijote y Sancho Panza en el castillo del Duque(1834-1835), de Jose Robreno. En todas ellas se advierte una recepcion eminentemente comica de don Quijote, caracterizadocomo personaje ridiculo, objeto pasivo de diversas burlas. EnglishIn this paper I analyze the dramatic construction of the character Don Quixote in seven pieces, four of them from the 18th Century: Fin de fiesta del juego de la sortija(1718), anonymous; El Alcides de la Mancha y famoso don Quijote(1750), by Rafael Bustos Molina; Las bodas deCamacho el Rico(1784), by Juan Melendez Valdes, and El amor hace milagros(1784), by Pedro Benito Gomez Labrador; and another three pieces from the 19th Century: Don Quijote de la Mancha resucitado en Italia(1805), anonymous; Don Quijote de la Mancha en Sierra Morena(1832), by Ventura de la Vega (adapted in 1861 with the title Don Quijote de la Mancha) and Don Quijote y Sancho Panza en el castillo del Duque(1834-1835), by Jose Robreno. In all these dramatic works it is appreciated an eminently comic reception of Don Quixote, shown as a ridiculous character, a passive object of various mockeries.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".