Theatre Meets Quantum Physics: René Pollesch’s Theatre for the Age of Technoscience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks closely at how the German director René Pollesch incorporates quantum physics into his theatrical practice. I argue that the double-slit experiment that Pollesch refers to in his play Probleme Probleme Probleme (2019) is key to understanding his non-representational theatre. I analyze the deep implications of this experiment for his theatre with respect to two aspects: (1) I highlight the fact that his interest in the writings of feminist and philosopher of science Donna Haraway is connected to a critique of representational theatre with its specific conceptualization of “the Human” as a Cartesian subject; and (2) in line with feminist and physicist Karen Barad, I discuss how the double-slit experiment, understood as a queer phenomenon, helps Pollesch rework central categories of drama and representational theatre. Subsequently, this allows me to conclude that Pollesch continues Bertolt Brecht’s project of a political “theatre for the scientific age” under new conditions. His theatre is a political theatre for the “technoscientific age” where “the Human” as opposed to its “Others” no longer exists. The term diffraction is key for understanding my analysis because it functions as an analytical tool that connects the aforementioned aspects. Moreover, it also describes my method of making visible the pattern that comes into being when Pollesch meets the double-slit experiment, or, more generally speaking, when theatre meets quantum physics.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Science and technology studies Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | high |
| gpt | Science and technology studies Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | high |
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".