Fletcher’s <i>Humorous Lieutenant</i> , Soldierly Identity, and Disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores disability and soldierly identity in John Fletcher’s comedy, The Humorous Lieutenant. The eponymous Lieutenant experiences chronic pain from an unnamed condition. He is an exceptional fighter until a battlefield wound relieves his chronic pain and he thenceforth refuses to enter combat. Fletcher’s Lieutenant inverses the increasingly common early modern figure of the combat-injured soldier experiencing difficulties reintegrating into society, as recognized in Elizabeth I’s 1592 “Act for Relief of Souldiors,” which, as Katherine Schaap Williams points out, registers “disabled” as “the veteran’s inability to work” (58). But inversion does not capture the full complexity of the Lieutenant’s condition in terms of its stage representation. The Lieutenant is subjected to intrusive questions, explications, and advice regarding his “ailment” and is manipulated and exploited via his condition for the state’s benefit. Language in response to his disease echoes in exhortations to other characters experiencing intense emotion rather than a physical condition. Characters employ misogynistic rhetoric that links women to weakness, impairment, and lack in explicit contrast to the conquering strength of the male soldier. I argue that, through these and other threads, the play troubles distinctions between ability and disability, health and illness. This troubling destabilizes what it means to be a soldier – a profession with a long tradition of admitting members based on physical prowess.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".