MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391312401 · doi:10.33137/rr.v41i4.32486

Hamlet and the Vision of Darkness

2019· article· en· W4391312401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rhodri Lewis, Goran Stanivuković

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHAMLET (protein complex)DarknessArtArtificial intelligenceLiteratureComputer scienceAstronomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hamlet that emerges from the pages of Rhodri Lewis's absorbing book is a play written by an intellectual writer, a dramatist attentive to dialectic and inspired by moral philosophy, especially by Cicero.Shakespeare's learnedness, Lewis demonstrates, in turn shapes the world of Hamlet's knowledge as a cognitive and dramatic resource for the play's action and language.With daring erudition, Lewis uncovers deep layers of the play's classicism produced by Hamlet's humanist liberal arts learning.He reveals how Shakespeare's rhetorical, dialectical, and philosophical techniques of argumentation and invention shape Hamlet as a cerebral character and how they determine his interaction with other characters around him on stage.As Lewis sets out to analyze "the qualities of Hamlet's mind and disposition" ( 11) and "the nature of the parts that he seeks to play" (11), in his ambitious book, he makes these directions the epicentre of his criticism aimed at reconstructing the intellectual universe of Hamlet's learning.The "kinetic flair" (17) of expression and thought, which Lewis ascribes to Hamlet, can equally be ascribed to the flare and force of his own critical discourse.Lewis's erudition shines on every page of this book illuminating numerous connections between the classical ideas about ethics, selfhood, emotion, power, art, eloquence, memory, the form of dramatic poetry, and the literary and historical contexts within which that form was created.In explaining how these individual elements work in this tragedy, which Lewis describes as an "architectonic whole" (8), he begins by exploring the performance of selfhood on stage, as it emerges from the play's engagement with Cicero's De officiis ("On duties").De officiis was a key classical text used in the grammar school for inculcating ideas about moral philosophy, and a work that shaped the humanist interpretation of moral philosophy, from which Shakespeare got the ideas that Hamlet deliberates.Lewis proceeds with critical sensibility to unpack a wide range of references and ideas, demonstrating the play's distinctive dramatization of the balance and tension between "the human condition" (41) and the dramatic art's "refusal" (41) to acknowledge the reality of that condition.

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 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 score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicRenaissance and Early Modern StudiesFrench-language works237,207