A Subtle Novelty: Repetition, transmission and the valorisation of innovation within North Indian Classical Music
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the interrelation between two aspects of North Indian classical music that at first might appear to occupy opposite poles of creativity and constraint. The first is the soloist’s actual construction of melody itself, and the interpretation of this as improvised. The second is sangat, the imitative instrumental accompaniment afforded such melodies when performed by vocalists. I argue that the conventional description of North Indian music as ‘improvised’ downplays the importance of the re-presentation of fixed materials, thus underemphasising the projection of tradition and transmission. In turn, I suggest that sangat has a homologous relationship to pedagogy, the process of transmitting traditional materials. Both melodic construction and imitative accompaniment derive aspects of their overall form and quality from, and may be understood in reference to, an ideational cluster that attempts to reconcile a socially validated and hierarchically underscored conservatism with an acceptance of individual innovation. Both practices may be seen as performed subjectivities standing at temporal interstices between tradition and contemporaneity, the broadly cultural and the individual.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".