Contestation of Perspectives Toward Suicide in The Film Monsieur Lazhar (2011) by Philippe Falardeau
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Suicide is one of the causes of death that occurs in a global scope but always causes divisive perspectives in various circles of society. For most people, suicide is a taboo topic, but not for other groups. The film Monsieur Lazhar (2011) is a film that shows the different perspectives between different age groups, namely the adult age group and the young age group, on a suicide that occurred at an elementary school in Montreal, Canada. This study aims at determining the different perspectives of the two different parties on suicide and the reasons for these differences in views. Pierre Bourdieu’s Champ de Force theory is the lens used in this research. The difference in perspective is influenced by the disposition system which Bourdieu calls the habitus. Habitus operates in a realm (champ). In the film, the domain in question is school. Meanwhile, Durkheim’s theory of suicide was chosen to determine the relationship of social problems to suicide. The method used in this research is content analysis. The data used are the chronological text of the scenes and the transcript of the conversations from the film. From the research, it was found that the school, which is the adult age group, has a counter and stigmatic view of suicide, reinforced by perceptions of psychological problems and social taboos. Meanwhile, students, who are in the young age group, tend to view suicide as a problem related to personal aspects and personal experiences so that they do not have a judgmental attitude like the school. Keywords : Suicide, Contestation, Realm, Perspective, Habitus
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".