Bibliographic record
Abstract
A vast amount has been written about this war. I was recently in Toronto University library, one of the world’s major research libraries, whose books on the World War fill some thirty bays of shelving: equivalent to a couple of hundred linear metres of books – just on this one war. So much has been published on the theme that one might be forgiven for thinking that little more of originality could be written about it, and yet new and fresh interpretations of all aspects of the war continue to appear on the shelves, on diverse areas of military, diplomatic and social history. One might mention, just considering English-language books, the general histories by Strachan, Stone and Ferguson; military histories such as the book by Alexander Watson; diplomatic histories like the influential volume by Hamilton and Herwig; and social histories such as Chickering’s on urban life in Germany during the war and Richard Holmes’ study of the British regular soldier. There have also been recent important works of bibliography on the War, and books covering such subjects as media representation and propaganda, as well as countless journal articles. In this issue of Film History we add to the Great War literature, looking at the film industry strictly during the period 1914–1918. This circumscription by date means that there is nothing here on later cinematic reflections of the War (The Big Parade, All Quiet on the Western Front, etc) – after all, a large literature already surrounds such cinematic reimaginings, Kelly’s aforementioned book being a leading example. Of course, a good deal has also been written about film within the 1914–18 period itself, but much remains to be done, as this issue demonstrates. For one thing, many of the articles here are about the situation in non English-speaking countries, whereas most of the existing writings in English (certainly in this journal) have dealt with British or American aspects of the War. This issue opens with Richard Abel’s examination of a spate of “feature” documentaries about the World War that were shown in the United States as the conflict was taking place. His principal sources are newspaper ads for the films, and from these it seems that many of them took a partisan line, with a striking number having a pro-German tone. Cooper Graham and Ron van Dopperen investigate the film career of Edwin F. Weigle, war cameraman for the Chicago Tribune, who filmed aspects of the defeat of Belgium in 1914, and also in Germany in 1915. Laurent Veray has studied film and the First World War for many years, and has published much on this theme, mainly in French: his paper in this issue summarises several aspects of his earlier work about official production by France during the war. Sabine Lenk’s article, based on documents in the Dusseldorf municipal archives, examines film censorship in that German city during the conflict. Then follow two papers on the situation in the Netherlands, which remained neutral in the War. Karel Dibbetts and Wouter Groot look at the exhibition of The Battle of the Somme (1916), as well as war Film History, Volume 22, pp. 363–365, 2010. Copyright © John Libbey Publishing ISSN: 0892-2160. Printed in United States of America
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".