An investigation into Québécois documentary filmmaking and the communication between neoliberalism and the aesthetic tactics employed by Richard Brouillette in his political documentary: Encirclement: How Neoliberalism Ensnares Democracy (2008).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between Québécois documentary filmmaking and neoliberalism has\nbeen tumultuous since the arrival of neoliberalism itself in the 1980s. Many scholars\nhave attributed this to Quebec’s political history, steeped in a battle between national\nidentity which was separate from the rest of Canada and restrictive governmental\npractices throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Richard Brouillette attempted to fuse,\ninvestigate and promote this history in his 2008 political documentary Encirclement,\nwhich is why this research uses it as an example of contemporary Québécois\nfilmmaking and also as a means of addressing Quebec’s social history and political\ninstitutions. This research focuses specifically on the aesthetic tactics employed by\nBrouillette and how they communicate with neoliberalism, given that the current global\neconomic climate is defined by the theory’s dominant strategies. This unifies a broader\ndiscussion on Québécois national identity which has observable ties to neoliberalism\nitself and engages with both historical filmic modes and questions of how Québécois\ndocumentary film will continue to redefine itself in an uncertain political environment.\nThis research also provides historical lineage to Brouillette’s Encirclement and\nquestions how affected it has been by an environment which has been slowly politicised\nover the decades. Ultimately, by exploring these broad avenues, this study opens a\ndebate on the nature of contemporary documentary filmmaking in Quebec and\ninvestigates the need for continued research into linguistic nationality, political\nexpression and how the two are connected.\nKey words: Neoliberalism, Encirclement, Quebec, Québécois, Brouillette,documentary
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".