On Awangarda: Tradition and Modernity in Postwar Polish Music by Lisa Cooper Vest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Awangarda: Tradition and Modernity in Postwar Polish Music (University of California Press, 2020) by Lisa Cooper Vest traces discourses of tradition, modernity, and progress in Polish new music composition between 1930 and 1965. Drawing on an extensive body of archival materials, Cooper Vest demonstrates ideas, interests, and stakes that were at play for different actors invested in the shifting musical milieu in mid-century Poland. This essay offers an overview of the book’s main arguments–including its new approach to the history of the Polish School–while highlighting the ways in which Cooper Vest’s work is compelling to Polish audiences. Rather than retreading the worn narrative of Polish post-war music culture as an extension of the broader East-West ideological conflict, Cooper Vest emphasizes the local Polish context. Mid-century musical discourse relied on a consensus that Poland had fallen behind on a fixed path of development. This idea of backwardness takes the form of two discursive gestures: lag and lack. Tracing the return of the nineteenth-century Romantic ideas about compositional genius, attributed first to Witold Lutosławski and later to a new group of young composers, Cooper Vest demonstrates that the Polish School phenomenon was a negotiated consensus, rather than a group that emerged organically. At the same time, the author documents the rise and fall of Bogusław Schaeffer and his individual vision for avant-garde composition. This unique contribution to the field of musicology also poses broader questions about mobilizing history and memory to consolidate a sense of national identity through music composition.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".