Anarchist theatre or workerâs theatre? Chile, 1895-1927
Bibliographic record
Abstract
this article is concerned with evaluating the importance of anarchist dramaturgy in Chile towards the end of the 19th century and during the fi rst quarter of the 20th century. In order to achieve this objective, Sergio Grez uses all available historical sources about the anarchist school of thought of this country, both primary sources and studies by various authors about Chilean anarchist theatre and Chilean theatre in general. Th e assertions of these writers are analysed in the light of new evidence collected from original sources of the period involved, including those cited in the works consulted with the objective of answering the question posed in the title of this text. Th e main conclusion of the study of plays produced by and for the labour movement in Chile between 1897 and 1927 is that the collection of theatrical works is rather more libertarian or worker’s theatre (in its broadest sense) than strictly anarchist, with specifi cally anarchist theatre being very rare. Nevertheless, Sergio Grez states that an anarchist theatre did exist during this period and it included the production of numerous works which were written by authors who were not anarchistsbut whose content and messages were shared by democrats, socialists and anarchists.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".