Literary notes about Mannerism (AI summary)
The term "mannerism" has been shaped by various authors to embody a range of meanings—from an imitative or repetitive habit to a refined, even noble, stylistic choice. In some literary contexts, such as in Kant's work [1, 2], it signifies a form of imitation or derivative exposition, hinting at a tendency toward repetition that might detract from originality. Conversely, Whitman praises a particular sort of procession in behavior, deeming it "great" and "noble" [3], suggesting that when properly channeled, mannerism can be both admirable and welcome. Meanwhile, Strunk cautions that overuse of a specific device can turn a creative technique into nothing more than a predictable mannerism [4, 5]. Irving and Wilde offer further nuance—Irving dismisses any trace of foppishness or excessive embellishment [6], while Wilde links mannerism with a clique-like exclusivity and a style that might alienate broader audiences [7]. Together, these varied citations illustrate that "mannerism" can be either a tribute to refined stylistic conduct or a critique of unoriginal and overlearned habits in literature.