Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the final musical compositions of Pavel Haas, Hans Krása, Gideon Klein, and Viktor Ullmann through the lens of variations form. These four instrumental works were written in the Terezín concentration camp in the summer of 1944, when the Nazi propaganda campaign promoting Terezín as a haven for the Jews of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was at its height. Somewhat unexpectedly all of these pieces make use of some kind of variation technique, employing it in different ways to comment on their situation and experience. Each chapter connects a variations composition with a historical moment, offering an analysis of the piece within the historical context. What emerges is a portrait of four artistic individuals who engaged deeply with their situation and environment and expressed it through their music. Pavel Haas used symbolic quotations and paraphrases to express themes of nationalism, death, home, and façade, while Hans Krása employed musical topics, unusual juxtapositions, and the reconfiguring of the Baroque passacaglia form for his evocations of façade, incongruity, fear, and death. Gideon Klein adapted a Classical Theme and Variations model to embed quotations revealing the dark aspects of the camp that the Nazis were trying to conceal, and Viktor Ullmann, the most philosophically-oriented composer of the group, used variations as a way of searching for truth in the spiritual as well as the mental and physical realms. Through these analyses, I offer new insight into the historical situation of Terezín and the expressive capacity of the music as the composers of Terezín used one of the most simple and flexible musical forms for their most profound artistic expression.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".