Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article argues that Palestinian cinema can collectively be understood as adopting a crip aesthetic that gives expression to how, after Jasbir K. Puar (2017) , Palestinians are routinely and systematically rendered disabled, or debilitated, by the Israel Occupation Forces. It is through the twin lenses of disability theory and critical race theory that I propose the concept of cinephilistinism, a term that attempts two things: firstly, to express an essayistic opposition to both a cinematic settler-colonial occupation and the support, be that tacit or explicit, lent to that occupation by various purportedly cinephilic institutions; and, secondly, to function as a means for currying what Steven Salaita might term, apropos of Indigenous and Palestinian relations (but here applied to Palestinian solidarity networks more generally), “inter/nationalism” or “solidarity, transnationalism, intersectionality, kinship, or intercommunalism” with Palestine at this moment of intensified Israeli state brutality. What is more, the article will latterly pitch cinephilistinism against a western theological Zionist myth regarding the (Second) Coming, which has Palestine as its focus, such that the battle for Palestinian freedom becomes the battle for the future of humanity, with cinema playing a key role in this struggle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".