Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the following, I argue against cognitivist film scholars, such as David Bordwell and Noël Carroll, for the relevance of Slavoj Žižek in the field of film criticism and theory. I argue that Žižek's work presents a wholly new mode of criticism which focuses on the ideological displacement of class struggle in cinema. Class struggle, according to Žižek, represents the social Real, in the Lacanian sense. By focusing on the Lacanian Real, as opposed to the Imaginary or the Symbolic, Žižek accomplishes what early film theorists were only too eager (but unable) to develop: a psychoanalytic theory of film. However, rather than focus on film spectatorship, I claim that Žižek's work is useful in critiquing the content of films. The focus, here, begins with an examination of early film theory and the critique thereof by cognitivist film scholars. Žižek's exegetic use of films is then examined before considering the concept of the Real in psychoanalysis. After considering the function of the Real in political analysis, I conclude by looking at the displacement of class struggle as the social Real in films.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".