MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389260070

Vers un nouveau théâtre politique: William Kentridge et les discours transculturels

2006· article· en· W4389260070 on OpenAlexaff
Liviu Dospinescu

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is an exploration of what seems to affirm itself as a new form of political theatre in William Kentridge’s work at the Handspring Puppet Company, based in Cape Town (South Africa). Within this framework, I will focus on those aspects of production through which theatricality finds a more silent, yet more effective way to expose the social, cultural and political landscapes of South Africa. There seems to be a link between Kentridge’s multi- and even transdisciplinary artistic approach and the south-african transculturality, which may explain some of the aesthetical, as well as the political sides of theatrical performances, such as Woyzeck on the Highveld (1992), Faustus in Africa (1994), and Ubu and the Truth Commission. These pieces will be analyzed here in order to better understand the moods, as well as the dynamics of the south-african shifting identities and their implications as a dramatic theme on the audience’s reception of what I call a silent politics. In these productions, the political discourse emerges out of the self-referential theme of identity and of its alterations, both at the formal and symbolical levels, as a subtle and effective performative act.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.023
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207