Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project adopts a formalist method of literary analysis to approach the modern genre of Shakespearean comic book adaptations. These texts have as yet received little attention from the academy, despite their sophisticated engagement with problems of visualizing the transition from stage to comics page, as well as their capacity for making original contributions to the interpretation of Shakespearean drama. The formalist method that this thesis employs is derived from the foundational work of comics theorists Will Eisner and Scott McCloud, combined with an understanding of Shakespearean language and stage conventions. Once this method is developed and explained, the dissertation uses it in a series of readings demonstrating the ability of Shakespearean comic books to emulate and elaborate on early modern staging practices, engage sensitively and imaginatively with Shakespeare’ literary language, and actually contribute to interpretive scholarly discussion of Shakespearean drama. Although many texts are examined, there is a particular emphasis on versions of The Merchant of Venice and Macbeth, which represent two extremes of the comics medium’s versatile formal engagement with Shakespearean themes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".