There is also a story in Lutosławski: Narrative archetypes in the first movement of Witold Lutosławski's second symphony
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narrativity in music is seldom connected to the compositions based on aleatoric procedures and the use of sound masses. Yet, it can be demonstrated that the first movement of Witold Lutosławski's Second Symphony projects a meaningful set of relations which is later called into question and reconfigured, thus meeting at least some of the conditions for narratological approach. The attention is focused on the tone pitch parameter and in that sense it can be noticed that the movement is founded on the alternation of twelve-note aggregate and symmetrical, all-combinatorial hexachord 012678. This description suggests invariance, the lack of directed movement, since both tonal arrays are characterised by a high level of entropy. In spite of this, there is a clear effort to achieve a directed movement, as a result of the procedures used to organise tonal pitches, and, especially, as a result of the treatment of hexachords. The paper will investigate how the flow of events in this movement can be related to the system of mythos - the archetypal narrative categories - as were first defined by the Canadian literary critic Northrop Frye, and adjusted for musical narrative by Byron Almén. The system is based on the intersection of the two fundamental opposites: defeat/victory and order/disorder, resulting in four categories: comedy, romance, irony/satire and tragedy. No matter how paradoxical it may seem, it is the abovementioned entropy that can be considered as the initial order, and its disorder is achieved by attempts to establish directed movement. The ambivalence of archetypal categories and their interweaving is not uncommon in the narrative process. Therefore, the possibility of various interpretations of narrative trajectory will be discussed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".