MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380667202 · doi:10.1353/flm.2019.0042

Celluloid War Memorials: The British Instructional Films Company and the Memory of the Great War by Mark Connelly (review)

2019· article· en· W4380667202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martin Stollery

Bibliographic record

VenueFilm & history · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhotography and Visual Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterScholarshipSpanish Civil WarWorld War IIFirst world warHistorySociologyArt historyMedia studiesVisual artsClassicsLawArtPolitical scienceAncient historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Celluloid War Memorials: The British Instructional Films Company and the Memory of the Great War by Mark Connelly Martin Stollery Mark Connelly. Celluloid War Memorials: The British Instructional Films Company and the Memory of the Great War University of Exeter Press, 2016. Hbk, 339 pp, ISBN 9780859899987; pdf, 339 pages, ISBN 9780859890526; epub, 339 p, ISBN 9780859890823. Books about British Second World War cinema and British film representations of that war have for a long time been more prominent, and produced in larger numbers, than their equivalents relating to the First World War. No doubt this relates to the firmly established popular memory of the Second World War, and the cinema associated with it, as Britain's 'finest hour', compared to more negative ingrained assumptions about the 1914-18 war. The centenary of the First World War, however, has further encouraged emerging new scholarship on British production of cinema during the war and subsequent British film representations of it. Mark Connelly's Celluloid War Memorials: The British Instructional Films Company and the Memory of the Great War, which focuses in detail on a cycle of war reconstruction films produced by British Instructional Films (BIF) during the 1920s, therefore usefully expands upon the work recently published in this field by film historians such as Michael Hammond and Lawrence Napper. BIF became a key player within the British film industry of the 1920s as a result of the success of its cycle of war reconstruction films, endorsed and supported by various branches of the military, and promoted on this basis, as well as in terms of their meticulous research and authenticity. These films mixed archival footage with re-enactments of key moments in various campaigns, as well as maps and models providing strategic overviews. Connelly devotes a chapter to one or two of each of the films within this cycle: The Battle of Jutland (1921), Armageddon (1923), Zeebrugge (1924), Ypres (1925), Mons (1926), The Battles of Coronel and Falkland Islands (1927). A key part of his argument is that cultural historians of the decade after the First World War should refocus their attention away from a selective emphasis upon a relatively narrow range of canonical literary texts, such as Robert Graves's Goodbye to All That (1929), and from 'a false division between what might be labelled heralds of realistic horror and pedlars of romantic myths about war' (10). For Connelly, the BIF war reconstruction films, often released to coincide with Armistice Day or the anniversaries of the battles they represented, belong in the sizeable cultural space between these polarities. They performed an important memorial function, framing the war as meaningful, celebrating valour and endurance, while also embracing pacifism and being lauded by supportive critics for eschewing what they perceived as the facile, vainglorious heroics of American war films. Celluloid War Memorials is the first book solely devoted to BIF's war reconstruction film cycle. As such, and given Connelly's expertise as a military historian, the book analyses how specific films were positioned within the contests around the remembrance of key campaigns and battles that took place during the 1920s. For example, Connelly explores how Ypres' representation of the resilience and humour of ordinary soldiers differs from more negative assessments of these battles, epitomised in Siegfried Sassoon's now much quoted lines from 1920: 'I died in hell - (They called it Passchendaele)'. Rather than tracking sentiments within the literary elite, Connelly is more interested in how the BIF war reconstruction film cycle resonated with the many veterans and their families, serving as celluloid monuments to struggles and sacrifices of which they wished to be proud. The book's opening chapter sets out the usual caveats about too easily assuming that published sources, such as publicity material and newspaper reviews, reflect the feelings and views of broader audiences who left few written traces of their responses. Within these acknowledged limitations, Connelly surveys critical responses to the films from around the British empire, arguing with ample evidence that they typically buttressed a 'supra-identity' of imperial belonging—which contained 'room for moments of local pride' (142)—in Canada, Australia, and elsewhere, at least as far as memorialising the First World War...

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFilm & historySame topicPhotography and Visual CultureFrench-language works237,207