MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380928761 · doi:10.3138/ctr.111.002

The Spectre of Straight Shakespeare

2002· article· en· W4380928761 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ellen Mackay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsAppealCynicismNationalismCourtshipLiteratureArt historyArtHistorySociologyAestheticsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The constitutive Shakespeareanness of Canadian theatre is a fact little neglected by either its historians or its critics. Yet the imperial logic that brought about this cultural paradox, and that surfaces, for instance, in Tyrone Guthrie’s invention of Shakespeare as the prerequisite to a national stage, or in Michael Langham’s grumpy contention with the “unnerving assault of Canadian nationalism” while at the helm of the Stratford Festival (7), remains a beguiling topic of critical inquiry, particularly for its flagrant, unapologetic visibility. What is perhaps less conspicuous – or rather, what lies hidden in plain sight – is the degree to which this institutionalization of Shakespeare at the heart of Canadian theatrical culture has promoted, by Stratfordian repetition, straight and narrow gender roles. Even those few productions that have foregrounded national issues rather than the putatively universal appeal of young or dynastic love – Langham’s Anglo/Québécois Henry V, for instance, or the Lepage/McCall Romeo & Juliette – only illustrate the reflexiveness with which Shakespearean dramatizations of courtship and marriage have been tapped as allegories of reconciliation for Canada’s “two solitudes.” 1 In other words, Canadian Shakespeare, when it acknowledges its local habitation, disseminates politics in terms and acts of heterosexual love.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary CriticismFrench-language works237,207