Pilgrimage Narrative: A Pattern for Heavenly Theatre in King Lear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I have always felt personally challenged and invigorated by one line in Peter Brook's canonical text The Empty Stage: “if the need for a true contact with a sacred invisibility through the theatre still exists, then all possible vehicles must be re-examined" (Brook 54). This thesis will endeavour to suggest and explore heavenly theatre, one possible vehicle to find that sacred invisibility. I will argue that heavenly theatre encompasses Peter Brook's understanding of holy theatre, but is more specific and tied to the manifestation of deity in the form of the Holy Spirit as understood and defined within my personal religious beliefs in LDS theology (of or belonging to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). The blue print, foundation, or first consideration in creating this heavenly theatre is narrative, and I will show that practitioners searching for the sacred or holy in theatre have largely neglected discussing narrative as a core element of their endeavours. Specifically, I will examine pilgrimage narrative, a potential blue print for heavenly theatre, but one which is not prescriptive. I will engage with pilgrimage through the seminal writings on Christian pilgrimage by the anthropologist Victor Turner and his wife Edith Turner, and go on to explore how the pilgrimage narrative is deeply embedded in King Lear. I will then conclude that this pilgrimage narrative parallels in many respects the journey of Jesus Christ, and how this parallel lends itself to the creation of heavenly theatre. When interviewed, the Canadian director Robert LePage once said he believed the purpose of theatre was to put us, “in contact with the gods" (Delgado 143). I agree with him, and this thesis represents the very beginnings of my personal journey, or pilgrimage as it were, to understand a little more as to how that may be possible.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".