Un hombre, un fuego y una sombra. Una aproximación intermedial al teatro de la imagen de Robert Lepage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El artículo estudia la utilización de las “tecnologías de la imagen” en el teatro de Robert Lepage y, específicamente, su incorporación del vídeo en diálogo con la acción escénica. Para ello, toma la perspectiva de la intermedialidad como hibridación de medios en escena, que es característica en las escenificaciones del director quebequense. Se aborda, así, el carácter técnico y estético de los modos de operación de la imagen mediada en algunos de los espectáculos de Lepage: Les sept branches de la rivière Ota (1994-1997), La face cachée de la lune (La cara oculta de la luna, 2000-2003), Lipsynch (2007), Les aiguilles et l’opium (Las agujas y elopio, 2013), 887 (2016) y Coriolanus (2019). This paper studies the usage of the “imaging technologies” in Robert Lepage’s theater, and, specifically, his incorporation of the video dialoguing with the action staged. In order to do that, this paper takes the perspective of intermediality as hybridization of media on stage, which is characteristic in the director from Québec.Thus, are addressed the technical and aesthetical character of the mediatized image’s modes of operation in some of Lepage’s productions: Les sept branches dela rivière Ota (The Seven Streams of the River Ota, 1994-1997), La face cachée de la lune (The Far Side of the Moon, 2000-2003), Lipsynch (2007), Les aiguilles etl’opium (Needles and Opium, 2013), 887 (2016) y Coriolanus (2019).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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; 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".