Music Hall and the Age of Resistance: A Study of the Censorship Practices Which Influenced the Form of the Victorian Music Hall Leading to the 1912 Royal Command Performance and Beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building on Penelope Summerfield’s argument that the end of the Victorian music hall in the early twentieth century signaled not “death” but a class-conscious evolution of the genre prompted by a “process of deliberate selection later made to look natural and inevitable,” this project examines the acts of censorship and resistance which characterised the final years of the Victorian music hall. Selecting the 1912 Royal Variety or Royal Command Performance as the “end” point of the genre, and limiting my focus to London music halls, this project examines competing aims of working, middle, and upper class participants: it suggests that the upper-class aspirations of the managers of London’s music halls, paired with middle-class moral desire for social control over the working-classes, eventually enforced by the London County Council in the mid-late nineteenth century, saw the rise of “respectability” in the genre while severing its ties to London’s working classes. Juxtaposing ephemeral evidence produced by or focused on London music halls in the late nineteenth century (leading up to and including the 1912 Royal Command Performance) with contemporary research on the classed nature of social control and censorship practices, this thesis intends to make the classed-struggle for power and ownership over the identity of London’s music halls evident. In doing so, the thesis alludes to the potential success of a third wave of music hall or the neo-music hall, to replace out-dated reflections of the music hall revival sparked by “The Good Old Days” and nostalgia post World War II.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".