MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116569953

Constructing the Motherliness of Manoah’s Wife in Cecil B. DeMille’s Samson and Delilah (1949)

2006· article· en· W2116569953 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anton Karl Kozlovic

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWifeEPICFilm directorOld TestamentArtLiteratureArt historyPhilosophyTheologyMovie theater
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cecil B. DeMille is an unsung auteur and master of the American Biblical Epic who produced and directed Samson and Delilah (1949). Historically speaking, this Technicolor testament was a watershed film that sired the rash of 1950s biblical epics, but few are cognisant of the artistic efforts that DeMille had expended to achieve scriptural, religious and emotional authenticity, even for his relatively minor film characters. A good example of this DeMillean artistry was the engineered motherliness of Manoah’s wife (Samson’s mother) whom DeMille called “Hazel…” on-screen and “Hazeleponit” off-screen. The critical literature was reviewed and DeMille’s cinematic construction of this honoured Israelite woman was explicated. It was concluded that DeMille was a far more subtle biblical filmmaker and knowledgeable gender engineer than has hitherto been acknowledged, and that he had deliberately chosen to accentuate the motherliness of this pious woman for contrasting dramatic effect. Further research into DeMille Studies, pop culture constructions of biblical women, and the interdisciplinary field of religion-and-film was recommended.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-JournalSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207