Wroth, Mary, Jane Cavendish, and Elizabeth Brackley. Women’s Household Drama: Love’s Victorie, A Pastorall, and The concealed Fansyes. Ed. Marta Straznicky and Sara Mueller.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Pastorall and The concealed Fansyes (both edited by Sara Mueller).Foregrounding the early modern household as a uniquely productive setting for the literary and theatrical activities of women, the editors explicitly intend the volume to foster and facilitate appreciation for women's household drama, in terms of both its theatrical and literary merits and its materializing a rich site of sixteenthand seventeenth-century English dramatic culture situated elsewhere, and configured differently, than the professional London stage.Editorial efforts to highlight both the materiality and the performance potential of these manuscript plays, while admirable in theory, prove challenging in practice, partly because the two are not always mutually compatible.While the editors faithfully reproduce the idiosyncrasies of the manuscripts, maintaining original spelling, punctuation, lineation, abbreviation, and layout, thereby successfully conveying the untidiness and inherent ambiguities of the texts as veritable works-in-progress, these efforts do little to assist readers attempting to imagine the plays in performance.Further, some idiosyncrasies-such as contracted, obscure, and occasionally confused speech prefixes; the lack of a referential dramatis personae; abrupt occurrences of new speech prefixes (changes of speaker) in the midst of some passages; and a general paucity of entrances, exits, and other stage directions-challenge readers envisioning performance and might have been fixed or supplied with minimal intervention.Although Straznicky and Mueller's approach of preserving the original features of the handwritten documents is laudable from a scholarly perspective, the results offer readers scant assistance in visualizing performance.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".