Kugelianism in the Discourse of Theater Scandal (Ukraine, the First Quarter of the Twentieth Century)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores the concept of theatre journalism, promoted from the end of the 19th century by Aleksandr Kugel and his publication, as well as the influence of Kugel, his media and the authors recruited by him on the expansion of the press and the instigation of the conflict between the press and the theatre. As an editor, Kugel gathered a quantitatively significant group of theatre journalists around his publication, the practice of which is considered not as an isolated case, but as a trend in theatre journalism that spread due to Kugel’s influence — Kugelianism. The methodology of the reconstruction of this model is based on the identification of focal points in Kugel’s publishing practice — conflicts between the press and the theatre, which took shape of theatre scandals or, as Kugel usually called them, “incidents,” in the unfolding of which he took an active part. The basic component of Kugelianism was the discourse of scandal, together with the structuring of the cultural space according to imperial models and the consistent construction of such relations between the press and the theatre, in which theatre journalism had to occupy a dominant position. Kugelianism stands out among the conceptual foundations of theatre journalism as it is marked by subjectivity, the presumption of one’s own taste and reliance solely on the journalist’s authority; granting criticism the status of an independent art form; impressionism as a stylistic ideal; imprudence of the journalist’s publicly expressed judgments, regardless of the form in which they are made public; “patriotic apoliticism” (protection of the foundations of the “Russian World”), as well as paradoxical inconsistency — the rejection of antiSemitism alongside consistent Ukrainophobia. The article outlines the role of Kugelianism in the formation of provincial self-identification in the Ukrainian theatre culture and defines the internal connection between the discussions that took place at the time among the Russian intelligentsia: about the crisis of the intelligentsia (about the intelligentsia and inteligentshchyna, i.e. pseudointelligentsia) and about the relationship between the press and the theatre.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".