Musical Mannerism: a Recurring Stylistic Phenomenon in Keyboard Variations by J.S. Bach, Beethoven, and Liszt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT \n\t \n\tMannerism was an artistic style that flourished in the sixteenth century between the High Renaissance and the emergence of the Baroque era. Originating in Rome and Florence in the 1520s, Mannerism eventually spread throughout Europe. Important Mannerist painters include Michelangelo, Pontormo, Parmigianino, Rosso, Bronzino, and El Greco. \n\tMannerism as an artistic style was not limited to painting and the visual arts. Mannerism thrived throughout the sister arts as well. Notable examples of Mannerism can be found in architecture, literature, and music. In music, the Italian madrigal is the purest expression of the Mannerist style. \n\tFrom roughly 1600 until 1900, the dominant critical view of Mannerism was negative. Mannerism was viewed as a degradation of the virtuous style of the Renaissance. As a result, Mannerism was largely ignored by critics and scholars. However, in the early twentieth century, this view began to change as scholars from across the artistic disciplines began studying Mannerism with renewed interest. A common goal amongst many of these scholars was to imbue Mannerism with positive qualities. \n\tAs scholars began to focus on this neglected style, ideas about Mannerism proliferated. One such idea that has gained traction across disciplines is that Mannerism is a recurring stylistic phenomenon not necessarily isolated to the sixteenth century. A proponent of this idea in the field of music was Canadian musicologist Maria Rika Maniates. \n\tThis document seeks to expand on Maniates’ arguments concerning recurring Mannerism. Specifically, this document will provide an overview of the history of Mannerism and analysis of keyboard works using Maniates’ criteria for recurring Mannerism. The keyboard works are J.S. Bach’s Goldberg Variations, Ludwig van Beethoven’s Diabelli Variations, and Franz Liszt’s Variations on a Theme of Bach, Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".