MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391312525 · doi:10.33137/rr.v42i3.33415

Desmet, Christy, Natalie Loper, and Jim Casey, eds. Shakespeare / Not Shakespeare

2019· article· en· W4391312525 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mark Fortier

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtArt historyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a history to be written of the reception of Shakespeare adaptations over the last fifty years or so.It would likely begin with a traditionalist dismissive disapproval, then move through grudging acknowledgment, categorization, nomenclature, and gatekeeping, an engagement with post-structuralist theory-especially Deleuze and Guattari-an expansive understanding of cultural evolution aligned with neo-Darwinism, and a move beyond narrowly dramatic or literary adaptation into myriad forms of popular culture.There would be an expansion of the definition of "Shakespeare, " as in Graham Holderness's touchstone in The Shakespeare Myth: "For every particular present, Shakespeare is, here, now, always, what is currently being made of him" (Manchester University Press, 1988, xvi).Certain metaphors would twist through this history: is Shakespeare the roots and trunk while adaptations are the branches and offshoots, or is Shakespeare a rhizome, like a field of potatoes, with no hierarchy or centre?Some of these steps in scholarly understanding are more or less settled; others not so much.Shakespeare / Not Shakespeare is a recent collection in this history, part of a book series called Reproducing Shakespeare with a dozen titles also part of this history.Shakespeare / Not Shakespeare itself has several overlapping foci.As its title suggests, the collection is interested in questions of identity, fidelity, and inclusion and exclusion.Following on Daniel Fischlin's collection Outerspeares, as several of the contributors acknowledge, many of the chapters focus on Shakespeare in new media: television, popular film, graphic novels, and so forth.Jennifer Hall discusses various twitter accounts that go under the name of Shakespeare (@shakespeare, @shakepearesong, @shakespearesays).Finally, the book arose from a conference session on "Accidental Shakespeare, " which the editors define as "Shakespeare as an excrescence, something extra rather than the essence of an artwork, but also Shakespeare as something that happens outside or in addition to authorial intention" (19).The collection also divides into case studies and theoretical explorations.For those interested in forms of new media and especially the particular works examined, the case studies will prove interesting.In these chapters, as the editors

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.018

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary CriticismFrench-language works237,207