Notice bibliographique
Résumé
THE RELIGIOUS FILM: CHRISTIANITY AND THE HAGIOPIC Pamela Grace. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, 180 pp. In preparing to teach an undergraduate seminar on religion and media, I have been looking for readings that approach the subject from the critical framework practiced by cinema and media studies. This has been surprisingly difficult. Although publications on the topic have certainly been multiplying, most of them, whether broad collections of essays or more focused examinations of particular icons, emerge from a theological perspective that operates with little attention to the aesthetic and communicative powers of audiovisual texts. Pamela Grace not only understands the complex doctrinal and emotional issues at stake in evaluating representations of religion; she also brings a set of analytical tools to these films that allows for their excavation as objects of art and ideology. The Religious Film provides a solid historical framework for some exciting theoretical conclusions, which makes it a comfortable book for undergraduates that is simultaneously full of rewarding material for more advanced readers. Scholarship on religion and media tends to be plagued by the potential enormity of its corpus: essentially, a book on the topic could be (and frequently is) asked to cover all the world's religions throughout media history. Grace avoids this pitfall by delimiting her objects through a careful definition of a genre. Using the term hagiopic, Grace separates films that detail the lives of holy figures from those that treat religion more generally. She determines to study the Christian hagiopic exclusively, describing a setting that operates according to what she calls miracle-time, an ancient location introduced by a prophetic voice-over narrator and peppered with robed men and women who might at any moment be visited by angels or cured of fatal illnesses. It is easy to imagine what films Grace has in mind, but although Joan of Arc (1928) and The Passion of the Christ (2004) feature prominently in her book, she also includes unusual films, such as Jesus Christ, Superstar (1973) and Jesus of Montreal (1989), that reveal our assumptions about the genre. These films share an attribute that provides the basis of a subtle political critique: because of their exceptional status, the suffering endured by these titular characters does not promote a greater understanding of the world's injustices but instead causes viewers to identify with them as victims. Thus, the hagiopic opens itself to intense emotional responses that nevertheless fail to inspire social change. After three initial chapters that introduce the genre, contextualize it historically, and review the relevant literature (a section that is valuable for students wanting to do more research on an individual text or perspective), Grace's remaining six chapters each focus on one or two films that typify different kinds of hagiopics. Rather than follow a chronological trajectory (which the author provides in brief in chapter 2), Grace organizes the chapters in relation to the aspects of the genre she identified at the outset. Thus, the fourth chapter, on Nicholas Ray's King of Kings (1961), deals with the notion of spectacle. Though it may seem strange that Grace chose to focus on this King of Kings rather than Cecil B. DeMille's 1927 version, her selection is important, for through her reading of the film as a commentary on negative representations of Judaism, she demonstrates the dangers of the anti-Semitism that proliferated in pre-World War II hagiopics and reemerged as a problem decades after the Holocaust. Without glossing over its inconsistencies, Grace shows how Ray's King of Kings constructs anticlimactic images that implicitly critique the standard biblical epic, of which DeMille stands as a primary representative. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».