The Cinematographic Refrain: Memory and Repetition in the Films of Hong Sang-soo and Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le présent article analyse les liens théoriques entre Henri Bergson et Gilles Deleuze dans le but d’examiner la mémoire et la répétition dans Un jour avec, un jour sans (Hong Sang-soo, 2015) et Syndromes and a Century (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2006). Ce travail examine en particulier la façon dont ces deux films articulent une structure double qui épouse une répétition systématique d’images, créant ainsi un sentiment prononcé de déjà-vu. L’analyse de ce phénomène s’appuie sur le schéma bergsonien du souvenir et de l’actualisation du passé. Cet article entend mettre en lumière l’expérience du temps dans les images cinématographiques selon Deleuze, en particulier en ce qui concerne les notions de cristal-image et de refrain. Ce type d’analyse vise également à souligner l’importance pérenne de la philosophie et du cinéma deleuziens dans le cinéma non européen, ainsi qu’à contribuer à l’établissement d’un lien entre le binôme cinéma-philosophie et le bouddhisme. Toutefois, l’objectif final de l’article est d’étudier la façon dont les deux films fournissent une compréhension fondamentale de la constitution du temps par le biais de la répétition.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".