<i>Defa’-e Moghaddas</i>(The Sacred Defense),<i>Hamdeli va Mehrvarzi</i>(Camaraderie and Love from Knowing the Other), and the Making of Social Cinema in Post-Revolutionary Islamic Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A publicity tool during the Iran–Iraq war (1980–1988), the cinema of the post-war period in Iran was expected to uphold Islamic, ethical, and symbolic values idealized by the government as defa’-e moghaddas (the sacred defense). The war film genre, which was launched during this period to promote these values, exclusively addressed the presence of men on the front lines. It barely made on-screen references to the role of women. Focusing on the gender dynamics of self-sacrifice and drawing on genres such as drama and melodrama, certain filmmakers used cinemay-e ejtema’i (the social cinema) to translate this ideal to the struggles back home. These films turned the gaze of the camera toward the hidden life of mazlooman (the oppressed). They thus shifted the meaning of defa’-e moghaddas and addressed socio-psychological suffering, oppressive cultural practices (‘ orf), and unjust sanction of legal codes of qisas (retaliation) as contradictory to Islam’s teachings on and cultivation of love, justice, and righteousness among ommat (the Islamic community). Focusing on the Iranian poetic vision of hamdeli va mehrvarzi (camaraderie and love from knowing the other), this essay traces affective states including affinity in struggle, rage, anger, and resistance. Linking instances of these states with Western feminist scholarship on the theory of affect, I discuss the cinematic process of claiming “the right to look” (Mirzoeff, Nicholas, The Right to Look: A Counterhistory of Visuality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".