Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviews 207 Quebec. Mère Augustine, as talented an administrator as she was formerly a pianist, oversees her little community and its convent school, known for its excellent music program. Vatican II lurks uncomfortably, the Canadian government is taking charge of education, religious schools are closing, and Augustine’s rebellious niece—a musical prodigy—arrives as a student. Augustine’s worlds collide. Pool adroitly interweaves the nuns’ public personae and their efforts to save their school, indeed their community , with vignettes of private moments and past lives. Individuals gradually emerge from the conformity of the black habits.We hear the music, integral to the convent and its teaching mission; we see iconic shots of snow, forests, and snow geese that suggest the sisters’ spiritual connection to their life and its activities. Their interactions with students add moments of drama as well as humor. Pool’s film constitutes a warm tribute to these women and their contributions to Quebec culture and history. In director/writer Mehdi Charef’s Graziella, time passes tentatively for a former nurse who loved to dance and a former projectionist who visualizes life in terms of movies—both prison inmates on work-leaves prior to their imminent release. Housed in adjoining cells at night, they ponder reintegrating themselves into a society that has neither forgotten nor forgiven their past actions. In spite of the odds arrayed against her, Graziella (Rossy de Palma) stubbornly pursues a second chance at life, one which includes Antoine (Denis Lavant). Experience teaching in prison literacy programs inspired this script and so realism is chillingly gritty at times. Nevertheless, Charef— a consummate storyteller—ends his tale on just a tiny note of redemption for his two humble protagonists. I could not resist cheering them on their way. University of Idaho, emerita Joan M. West Witt, Michael. Jean-Luc Godard, Cinema Historian. Indianapolis: Indiana UP, 2013. ISBN 978-0-253-00728-5. Pp. 274. $35. Faithfully encapsulating and conveying his belief in cinema’s unique ability to capture and express history as it unfolds, Godard’s Histoire(s) du cinéma stands as the culmination of a lifetime of work. Originally released in 1998 by Gaumont, the video project acts as a lens through which scholars can analyze all things Godard. Michael Witt explores the themes presented in Histoire(s) du cinéma, as they relate to Godard’s three previous decades of work. According to Witt, one key point to note in analyzing Godard’s work is cinema’s dependence on the individual spectator for the creation of meaning. According to Godard, meaning is created “at the juncture of memory, thought and emotion”(18) not of the collective viewing audience, but of the singular spectator. Therefore, what is viewed and understood is relative to the one doing the viewing, and the individual is forced to become part of the creation process. Recycling is another important component in the comprehension of Godard’s project. In the compilation of images, scenes, and words that make up Histoire(s) du cinéma, Godard relies heavily on the usage of films and art already in existence. Through the mélange of pre-existing works, Godard was able, according to Witt, to portray the camera as an X-ray machine (98–99) with the ability to bear witness to imperceptible realities and to social injustices present throughout history. This understanding of the role of the camera is further reinforced through Godard’s intertextual dialogue with found footage essayists of his time, such as Santiago Álvarez, Mikhail Romm, Chris Marker and Artavazd Peleshian. Throughout his analysis,Witt points to many individuals and ideas that influenced Godard, including, but not limited to, Guy Debord, well-known for his theories on recycling and resistance, Deleuze and Hugo, for their use of art and text as resistance, as well as Faure and Malraux, art historians, and Merleau-Ponty, a theorist. Another important aspect to note in the creation of Histoire(s) du cinéma is the amount of time Godard spent refining his ideas and piecing together the film. On many different occasions, and with various colleagues, Godard set out to create a film about the importance of capturing history through cinema...
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.215 | 0.042 |
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".