MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326874311 · doi:10.1080/17411548.2016.1140491

Team Snow Queen: feminist cinematic ‘misinterpretations’ of a fairy tale

2016· article· en· W2326874311 on OpenAlexaff
Pauline Greenhill

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in European Cinema · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)SnowBeautyArtNarrativeGestureArt historyLiteratureAestheticsPhilosophyGeographyMeteorologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four women directors’ live-action films available in English – Päivi Hartzell’s feature Lumikuningatar (The Snow Queen, 1986), Danishka Esterhazy’s short The Snow Queen (2005), Tamar van den Dop’s feature Blind (2007), and Catherine Breillat’s feature La belle endormie (The Sleeping Beauty, 2010) – use Hans Christian Andersen’s story ‘The Snow Queen’ as hypotext. Explorations of gendered positions in culture and in film, directly linked to a readily identifiable fairy tale, these works offer a compelling example of how geographically and temporally dispersed adaptations can share perspectives beyond their common source material, ones which I argue can be directly linked to what one director felicitously called a (feminist) ‘misinterpretation’ of the original. First, their Snow Queens are lookers in two senses: having a beautiful physical appearance, and actually looking and seeing within the films’ diegeses. Second, they show the Snow Queen’s physical movements and gestures as stylised or unusual. Third, they conflate the characters of Gerda and Kai and/or problematise their gender, making it ambiguous, doubling it, or rendering it in composite. Fourth, unlike Andersen’s story, these films’ climactic scenes focus on interactions/relations between Kai/Gerda and the Snow Queen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in European CinemaSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207