Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robinson Jeffers’s adaptation of Euripides’ Medea, starring Judith Anderson in the title role, was one of the most successful works on Broadway in the immediate post-war period. This work’s extraordinary critical and popular success is surprising on a number of levels: as an adaptation of classical Greek drama and as a highbrow offering by a politically controversial writer. With little theatre experience to date, Jeffers produced an intellectually demanding work of serious poetic drama infused with his radical sensibility at a time when the theatre landscape was fostering light entertainment or psychological realism and political, social, and cultural agendas were shifting forcefully toward conservatism. That Jeffers’s play could become so popular in 1947 and, even more remarkably, be selected four years later to represent the United States at the Berlin Arts Festival speaks to the way the play in performance complicated the politics of the text. Anderson’s playing of the title role worked against the text’s liberal politics, enabling it to be recuperated as an emblem of American Cold War conservatism. This article identifies strands in Anderson’s performance that, in their dialogue with Jeffers’s text, help explain both the adaptation’s extraordinary success and the production’s ongoing significance as a liminal moment in American theatre and acting.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".