Failure in Gaining the American Dream in Sam Shepard’s Curse of the Starving Class
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study highlights the importance of understanding the complexities of the American Dream, and the challenges that can arise in pursuing it, both on personal and societal levels. This study sought to investigate the failure of an American family in achieving their American dreams; how they attempted to achieve their dreams, what caused them to fail, and what the consequences were for their family. Based on library research, the authors used a descriptive qualitative method. The study used Marx’s theory of class struggle to analyze how the characters’ dreams are influenced and limited by their social class. The study also used the concept of the American Dream, which has three components: a richer, better, and fuller life. The primary data were derived from the script of Sam Shepard's play, Curse of the Starving Class. The supporting data came from English literature journals, English literary theories, e-books, and other internet sources. The data was classified, analyzed, and then presented in a report. According to the study that the writers conducted, all the characters in the play had their dreams, but none of them were realized. This study sheds light on the complex nature of the American Dream. This study reveals the obstacles and challenges that can stand in the way of success, as well as the consequences of such failure. The study finds two factors that make the characters fail to achieve their dreams, namely the internal and external factors. The internal factors consist of the broken family structure, financial problems or poverty, negative escapism, failure in self-reflection, and unrealistic dreams, while the external factors come from a lack of opportunities, societal pressure, and predatory business practices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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, 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".