MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W246125950

Mediated Associations: Cinematic Dimensions of Social Theory

2003· article· en· W246125950 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Dyrk Ashton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Film Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterFilm theoryNarrativeSociologySocial theoryPoliticsCritical theoryAestheticsPower (physics)Reading (process)Media studiesArt historyArtLiteratureEpistemologyPhilosophySocial scienceLawPolitical scienceLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MEDIATED ASSOCIATIONS: CINEMATIC DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL THEORY Daniel O'Connor Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2002, 209 pp. Daniel O'Connor's Mediated Associations draws heavily upon Gilles Deleuze's Cinema 1: The Movement-Image and Cinema 2: The Time-Image. O'Connor's project is based on Deleuze's theory of movement and time, drawing out the inherent social characteristics of the cinema books, while interjecting aspects of social theory to support and expand upon Deleuze's work. This reading of the cinema books as social theory, combined with O'Connor's employment of contemporary film examples, offers some valuable contributions to film studies. O'Connor is concerned with the effect that cinema has on society due to its devices of power, control and discipline. Following Deleuze, he claims that it is in the very functioning of cinematic and montage that these devices operate. O'Connor's political agenda is no more radical than Deleuze's, but certainly more pointed. For O'Connor, the cinema exercises form of that is public and commonplace; he states that the most insidious of are those that control everyday associations, that operate right before our eyes, in the open, and in full public view. His approach works outside of the usual methods of inquiry into the discursive of the cinema that are based in psychoanalysis, linguistics or narrative. Film scholars may be somewhat put off by O'Connor's entry into this discussion of film theory without mentioning other writers who have taken up this topic, but Deleuze himself is open to the same criticism. Deleuze's cinema books are first and foremost works of philosophy, and not of cinema theory per se. He uses the cinema to illustrate, or even stand in for, the philosophical concepts he wishes to describe, and he creates taxonomy of as they appear in the cinema to aid in his explanatory process. By the same token, O'Connor's is work of social theory, and not work of film theory per se. He utilizes many of Deleuze's names for images, but changes others and fashions few of his own. Deleuze's images can manifest themselves as part of shot, series of shots, the film as whole, and perhaps most importantly, the world of the film. O'Connor's approach concentrates more on montage than on the plethora of intricately categorized described by Deleuze. In the cinema books, the movement-image and the time-image are the two major classifications of images, and other types of fall under each classification. For Deleuze, different types of function as ways of thinking or modes of consciousness on the level of pre-language: the enconcable, or utterable, that has not yet become language. The movement-image contains the sensory-motor link operates as cause and effect, or action and reaction. The movement-image and its most representative form, the action-image, embody systems of judgment, conventions of common sense, and linear modes of thought-in short, the ingrained ways of thinking that have dictated life for centuries in much of the world. O'Connor delves more deeply into and expands upon the spatial dimension of Deleuze's theory of movement and time, developing conceptualization of the relationship between the power of the social imaginary and the nature of [cinematic] images. He takes Deleuze's attention to the functioning of types of as modes of thought, and turns this into focus on methods of montage as developing forms of sociality create habitus, or manner of looking, in the broad sense of the term. For O'Connor, the cinematic apparatus operates as social apparatus, and the cinematic interface operates as social interface. O'Connor defines the cinematic interface, which occupies time rather than space, as a transitional moment in the interval between seeing and the seen. …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Film StudiesSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207