MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067467014 · doi:10.1386/jac.2.2.111_1

Funding, ideology and the aesthetics of the development film in postcolonial Zimbabwe

2010· article· en· W2067467014 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of African Cinemas · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican studies and sociopolitical issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyMovie theaterAestheticsColonialismNarrativeSociologyFilm genreMedia studiesGender studiesArtHistoryVisual artsLiteraturePolitical scienceLawArchaeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers the relationships between aesthetics and ideology in donor-funded development film-making from Zimbabwe, examining in particular how the films' producers have attempted to popularize a genre of film-making that has its roots in colonial cinema. Making close reference to two productions from the Harare-based Media for Development Trust (MFD) Neria (Godwin Mawuru, 1992), and Everyone's Child (Tsitsi Dangarembga, 1996) (both of which may be regarded as archetypal examples of their genre) the article demonstrates how the films deploy a range of aesthetic strategies to imbue a set of narratives drawn from colonial development films with greater impact and cultural resonance for contemporary local audiences. The article also suggests that close analysis of these strategies may provide insights into the relationships between the films' aesthetic dimensions and wider ideological issues in the region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of African CinemasSame topicAfrican studies and sociopolitical issuesFrench-language works237,207