Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the course of the last century, scholars and musicologists have debated the piety of Felix Mendelssohn. It is plausible to argue that Mendelssohn was purely Jewish, and that his musical contributions to the liturgy of the Christian Church are merely a consequence of cultural pressure and widespread Anti-Semitism. However, it is also conceivable that Mendelssohn not only embraced the Christian tradition for himself, but also endeavoured to reform its theology and doctrine. How then, should we understand Mendelssohn’s faith? Given that the oratorio functions as a vehicle for religious expression, I employ three of Mendelssohn’s most widely discussed oratorios as the main subjects of the paper’s investigation. By analyzing the text, musical characteristics, and historical context of Mendelssohn’s St. Matthew Passion, Paulus, and Elias, I explore the ways in which Mendelssohn was deeply and inwardly conflicted with his faith. Moreover, such oratorios illustrate how Mendelssohn’s religious discernment was a non-linear evolutionary process; by the time Mendelssohn composed Elias (1846), his trajectory of religious discernment culminated in the reconciliation of both the Jewish and Christian aspects of his identity. While Mendelssohn’s music narrates the ancient Judeo-Christian story, it also simultaneously exposes his own account of religious polarization and the subsequent desire for harmonization.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.011 | 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".