Cinema, Crisis, and the Plurality of Meaning: An Interview with Nadine Labaki
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Cinema, Crisis, and the Plurality of Meaning:An Interview with Nadine Labaki Zeina Tarraf (bio) and Nadine Labaki (bio) When it comes to Lebanese cinema, few names elicit as much spirited contention and instant familiarity as nadine labaki's. While there are many Lebanese filmmakers who have established themselves as worthy auteurs, what originally set labaki apart from her counterparts was her ability to comfortably inhabit the confines of cultural cliques and film festival circuits and simultaneously resonate among a wider local audience. For the longest time, to the ordinary local viewer, nadine labaki was Lebanese cinema. Known initially as the director behind the salacious music videos for Lebanese pop star nancy ajram, labaki's celebrity status was solidified by the fact that she often stars in her own films. She also often appears in the works of other filmmakers who capitalize on her fame to make their films more Click for larger view View full resolution Nadine Labacki by Fares Sokhn [End Page 211] marketable. Most recently, she starred in mounia akel's widely successful Costa Brava, Lebanon (2021): inspired by the trash crisis in Lebanon in 2015, the film is about a family whose seemingly idyllic mountain retreat from the toxicity and social unrest of Beirut is disrupted by the construction of a garbage landfill right outside their home. Labaki herself has frequently used her fame to draw attention to social issues, more particularly the interlocked crises that are currently plaguing Lebanon. Recent examples include a video she produced starring Cate Blanchett that raises awareness about the infamous Beirut Blast, as well as a controversial parody music video encouraging people to plant their own produce as a way of curbing the effects of the currency collapse and the dramatic rise of market prices.1 These different projects evidence the wide scope of Labaki's unique celebrity status. The mass appeal of Labaki and her work alongside the legitimatization of her success by various national and global institutions—from her honorary doctorate from the American University of Beirut to her Academy Award nomination in 2019—showcase Labaki's striking ability to captivate a multitude of diverse audiences. Her directorial career is as varied as her audiences. Her first feature, Caramel (2007), gained prominence for its portrayal of female friendship and intimacy unfolding against the backdrop of a dynamic city. Set mostly in a beauty parlor, and with a vibrant cinematography interlaced with sensual and suggestive images of melting caramel (waxing sugar), the film follows a group of women who navigate different societal pressures. While most Lebanese cinema up to that point had been preoccupied with processing the memory of the fifteen-year civil war (1975–1990), Labaki's film was a refreshing delve into the ordinary and succeeded in "softening Lebanon's image" not only for international audiences whose perception of Lebanon was marred by a mediascape of war and violence but also for local and diasporic viewers enthusiastic to see alternative representations of themselves on the big screen.2 Similarly, her second feature, Where Do We Go Now? (2011), proved to be a highly entertaining piece that won the audience prize at the Toronto Film Festival and broke box-office records in Lebanon. In Where Do We Go Now?, Labaki did broach the subject of conflict, following the plight of a group of village women attempting to divert [End Page 212] the men in their lives away from civil strife. Nevertheless, her tone remained mostly lighthearted. Their comic antics range from hiring Russian prostitutes, to faking spiritual revelations, and ultimately lacing the men's food with hashish. Finally, Labaki's latest and perhaps most successful and most controversial film, Capernaum (2018), departs significantly from the framings that structured her previous features to shed light on the lives of destitute, marginalized, and undocumented communities in Lebanon. The film landed her multiple accolades including an Oscar nomination, a fifteen-minute standing ovation at Cannes, and the festival's coveted Jury Prize. While many have recognized the importance of Labaki's work, particularly for the conversations it generates about gender and its entanglement with national politics, and for her ability to "sustain a complex enunciative performance" through appealing powerfully to diverse...
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 | 0,004 | 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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».