How do Sargent's Ch. XVI and XVII (1916) line up with Baker (C3-B236-S60), the character-change concordance update (C3-B273-S85), Phillips on economy (C3-B259-S74) and Esenwein and Leeds on stage limits (C3-B281-S90): where do they agree, differ or stay silent?
By candidate ID, not by re-reading: on method of characterization Sargent (1916 screen) agrees with Baker (1919 stage) that action beats description, and permits a brief cast-line hint for director and players where Baker, as relayed, bars the author describing characters in his own voice (text, program notes, elaborate stage directions), a difference that may be only one of scope; on change, Sargent adds a gradual-deepening statement and a pre-established-trait example to what C3-B273-S85-06 records, which lists only Baker and Archer as having preparation devices; on cost, Sargent supplies the mechanism (flat price) and dollar illustrations Phillips lacks, and his "cost against effect" rule matches the Esenwein and Leeds worth-while test; on animals and child actors he is silent where Phillips speaks. The tension to review: Sargent calls added suggestion and direction a mistake, while Esenwein and Leeds advise a difficult scene be written as a suggestion with two ways.
Structured fields
{
"citations": [
{
"url": "https://archive.org/stream/techniqueofphoto00sarg/techniqueofphoto00sarg_djvu.txt",
"note": "sar.flat (a3cff7eb) offsets per candidate"
}
]
}Evidence claims
- [sourced_fact] By candidate ID, not by re-reading: on method of characterization Sargent (1916 screen) agrees with Baker (1919 stage) that action beats description, and permits a brief cast-line hint for director and players where Baker, as relayed, bars the author describing characters in his own voice (text, program notes, elaborate stage directions), a difference that may be only one of scope; on change, Sargent adds a gradual-deepening statement and a pre-established-trait example to what C3-B273-S85-06 records, which lists only Baker and Archer as having preparation devices; on cost, Sargent supplies the mechanism (flat price) and dollar illustrations Phillips lacks, and his "cost against effect" rule matches the Esenwein and Leeds worth-while test; on animals and child actors he is silent where Phillips speaks. The tension to review: Sargent calls added suggestion and direction a mistake, while Esenwein and Leeds advise a difficult scene be written as a suggestion with two ways. · locator: sar.flat (a3cff7eb) offsets per candidate source
Rights
| component | license | hosting | redistribution | modification | training | Evidence and notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| documentation | unknown | permitted | permitted | unknown | unknown | Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources. |