« Délectable Lecter » : réification et (homo-)érotisation des corps masculins dans la série télévisée Hannibal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose d’analyser la manière dont la série télévisée américaine Hannibal (NBC, 2013-2015) représente les corps de ses principaux personnages masculins. Nous formulons l’hypothèse que ce programme remet en question les normes de représentation genrée « traditionnelles », grâce à un processus de réification, et à une (homo-)érotisation de ces corps. Pour le montrer, nous étudierons tout d’abord les différentes techniques, formelles et narratives, ainsi que les choix esthétiques qui transforment les protagonistes en « hommes-objets ». Puis nous aborderons la question de leur érotisation, en montrant que la série a recours à des techniques filmiques habituellement réservées aux personnages féminins, pour faire des protagonistes masculins des objets de désir. Enfin, nous nous poserons la question des points de vue, en montrant que l’œuvre opère un renversement de la notion de male gaze (regard masculin), au profit d’un female gaze et d’un gay gaze.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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; 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".