‘Entrances’, ‘Exits’ or ‘Nodes’, ‘Edges’, ‘Clusters’?: Simon Stone, & the Director as a ‘Network Subject’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Australian theatre director Simon Stone has emerged as a major presence on the European stage since the International Ibsen Festival presented his The Wild Duck ‘after Ibsen’, co-written with Chris Ryan, in 2012. Prior to Stone, Barrie Kosky and Benedict Andrews, the most influential directors of their generation in Australia, had established themselves as internationally significant artists in Europe. This article explores Stone’s imbrication in theatrical networks defined by Kosky and Andrews and the director as a relational phenomenon. It shifts analysis from the director as a singular subject to a network subject by deploying datasets held in AusStage (www.ausstage.edu.au) to firstly, chart the ecosystem of artists intrinsic to Stone’s career in Australia and Europe, secondly, to anatomize the concept of the network subject by interrogating the reoccurring connections and patterns of participation constituting the director, thirdly, to examine correlations between Stone, Andrews, and Kosky and thereby the question of the transference of artistic influences and Australia’s cultural relationship to Europe, and finally, to touch on the role of repertoire in Stone’s theatrical endeavour. In doing so, the article contends that the intersecting relationships intrinsic to Stone’s theatrical experience expose critical embodied junctures in the development of his directorial signature, and as such, constitute a means of identifying and measuring (circuits of) influence and aesthetic tendencies more broadly.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".