A Postmodern Cinema: The Voice of the Other in Canadian Film / Canadian National Cinema
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A POSTMODERN CINEMA: THE VOICE OF THE OTHER IN CANADIAN FILM Mary Alemany-Galway Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2002, 259pp. CANADIAN NATIONAL CINEMA Christopher E. Gittings London: Routledge, 2002, 338pp. It is good to see two non-Canadian presses adding to burgeoning list of books on Canadian While Mary Alemany-Galway's A Postmodern Cinema is revision of (indeed it is still referred to thesis in Introduction), Christopher Gittings's Canadian National Cinema is part of Routledge's series on national cinemas and is presumably intended textbook. Despite their different origins and purposes, both books deal with Canadian films in conjunction with theoretical agenda that provides much of their interest, but also gives rise to number of problems. They both discuss Canadian films within context of national culture, but they are founded on radically different ideas about film spectatorship. Alemany-Galway sets out to construct a poststructuralist/postmodern film that draws on earlier formalist, phenomenological, and structuralist theories. She adroitly synthesizes these theoretical perspectives, often seen mutually exclusive, and argues that they can be combined to account for a particular film style and its underlying epistemology. The style in question is a resistant postmodernism that has enabled Canadian filmmakers to foreground point of view of 'other' within society. Denys Arcand's Jesus of Montreal, Patricia Rozema's I've Heard Mermaids Singing, Atom Egoyan's Family Viewing and William MacGillivray's Life Classes are analyzed postmodern films which do not resolve their contradictions, leaving conclusions up to viewer. The viewer has much less freedom in model used by Gittings. Drawing on ethnographic methodology, he explores the contested ground of national...across range of Canadian cinemas, from early white-invader settler films...through to ethnographic cinemas, documentary, experimental and feature films produced by Canada's so-called 'founding nations' and including First Nations cinemas and multicultural fields of vision. This admirably broad perspective is, however, tied to version of ideological theory associated most notably with Louis Althusser, which tends to regard viewer passive consumer of dominant ideology. The trajectory that book traces takes us from colonial melodramas like Don Haldane's Drylanders, which recruit viewers invader-settler citizens, to post-colonial texts like Alanis Obomsawin's Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance, in which spectator is treated a terrain to be organized, and Srinivas Krishna's Masala in which white spectator is forced to identify with Indo-Canadian camera eye. Although Gittings does refer to recent critical work on melodrama by Peter Brooks, Christine Gledhill, and Susan Hayward, he stresses their accounts of genre's ideological constraints and ignores their interest in tensions and ambiguities at work within melodramatic texts. Contrary to recent feminist work on Back to God's Country, for example, Gittings argues that the spectator posed by discursive organization of film is a white Anglo-Protestant male and that Nell Shipman's creative contribution is negated by her function as passive erotic object on display and by an ending that re-inscribes dominant. As in much of theory derived from Althusser, there is rather mechanical quality to this analysis that reduces films to their ostensible ideological projects. In his reading of Robert Lepage's use of Alfred Hitchcock's I Confess in Le Confessional, Gittings even surprising claim that Hitchcock's film makes no reference to itself cinema. The structure of both books is governed by their authors' theoretical interests. The first five chapters of Alemany-Galway's A Postmodern Cinema-roughly half book-do not deal with Canadian cinema at all. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,022 | 0,019 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».