Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article argues that the philosophical and psychological concepts of resentment and ressentiment serve as compelling motivational forces in the lives and actions of the central characters that comprise the American TV seriesBetter Call Saul(2015–22). For Nietzsche and Scheler, ressentiment involves the internalization of hostile affects that tend to reinforce a sense of powerlessness and feelings of inferiority. Unlike ressentiment, which can linger for a long time, resentment is an active and immediate mode of resistance that supports its stance against the conformist tendencies of passive or reactive forces. Resentment, if properly directed externally, can serve as an empowering and a creative, active force in a character’s life. For Jimmy McGill, resentment functions as a primary catalyst for his eventual transformation into the unethical, yet prosperous, criminal attorney Saul Goodman. Resentment, if directed inwards, can produce debilitating effects such as Jimmy’s older brother Chuck’s incapability to move past his hatred and envy over his younger brother’s past actions and successes as a lawyer. This article illuminates the role and character of resentment and ressentiment as affective forces for characters in television melodramas.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".