MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162403347 · doi:10.18274/dqvh8224

Shakespeare and the Eighteenth-Century Actress

2023· article· en· W3162403347 on OpenAlex
Fiona Ritchie

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBorrowers and Lenders The Journal of Shakespeare Appropriations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Presentation (obstetrics)ArtOrnamentsArt historyVisual artsLiteratureHistoryPhilosophyStyle (visual arts)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

David Garrick is frequently credited with revolutionizing the acting profession and the presentation of Shakespeare through his appearance in Shakespearean roles in the eighteenth century. But the actresses who performed alongside him were also hugely influential in pioneering a new conception of Shakespeare on the stage. Performers such as Catherine Clive and Hannah Pritchard were celebrated for their acting talent in works such as Charles Churchill's The Rosciad (1761) and Thomas Davies's Dramatic Miscellanies (1784). This paper will trace the history of women's performance of Shakespeare in the eighteenth century and will focus on the accounts of Clive's and Pritchard's acting. I suggest that performing Shakespeare helped actresses to be taken seriously as artists for the first time, allowing them to be admired and respected for their skill in their profession rather than to be treated primarily as "ornaments to the stage," as they were in the Restoration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.183 · 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