Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter discusses the publication of contemporary drama by British and Irish publishers in the first half of the twentieth century. The emergence of drama as a serious literary form on the page is traced to the 1890s when resistance to the continued obstacle of stage censorship encouraged the printing of more plays, and copyright reform provided new publishing opportunities for dramatists. The chapter traces the cultural and commercial investment of firms like William Heinemann, Gerald Duckworth, and Sidgwick & Jackson in the publication of European dramatists, notably Henrik Ibsen, and the writers associated with the New Drama. It also discusses the emergence in the 1920s and 1930s of series and anthologies issued by Ernest Benn, Victor Gollancz, and others which raised the profile of the contemporary stage. The publishing histories of leading and commercially successful dramatists of the period, such as George Bernard Shaw, John Galsworthy, Noël Coward, and J.M. Barrie, are outlined; the chapter also discusses the publishing contexts of key movements and traditions such as suffragist theatre, the drama of the Irish literary revival, and the repertory movement. Finally, the chapter considers the complex relationship between reading and performance, showing how the traditional division between reading editions and acting editions, such as those issued by Samuel French, broke down with the expansion of educational markets and paperback publishing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.018 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".