Music is therefore an art subject to the laws of movement and order, and by these laws it is linked to nature. Who does not immediately see that it is linked to it by infinitely less close ties than the other arts and that it is, of all, the one who draws from the least the least part of its constituent elements? The plastic arts find shapes and colours in the outside world: poetry delivers precise words from languages a means of expressing the beauty of the outside world and of trying to interpret it.
Music meets sound there, and of this element, insignificant in itself, without charm and without variety, it can only take advantage by means of innumerable transformations and elaborations, since it does not occur in nature nor under the aspect of consecutive sequences or under that of simultaneous combinations, it does not offer any truly musical element. The other arts will therefore be performing arts, because, as Wagner said, “They all relate to a real object, while the music is addressed directly to us without representing us any particular thing”. They are, far less than music, a purely human creation.
Music Is an Art
If musical art is really more than all the others a pure creation of man, one would a prior be led to think that this artificial character can diminish in some way the force and the power of its action. It is not, however, and the music acts on us more intensely perhaps than anything else. NaijaVibe feels you to prove this truth, there is no need to quote the thousand more or less reliable anecdotes which are current on this subject. We cannot base a scientific theory on such insecure bases. But if we reflect a little on the nature of musical sensations, we will easily feel that the dynamic power of the elements that music uses is really higher.
A sound produced on our ear a sensation much stronger than a single line isolated on our eye; a melody, a group of chords impress our sensitivity more vividly than any object submitted to our gaze. Our sensory or visual organs, by the very fact that they are continually affected, have become less delicate. It is not the same with the ear: if our eyes continually contemplate spectacles which, artificially reproduced, could without major changes constitute a painting, our ear rarely perceives sounds which, by their musical character and their intensity, are likely to enter an artistic whole. Add, moreover, that there is no music without well-established and strongly characterized rhythm, and that the dynamic power of rhythm is indisputable.
So it is not surprising that music , apart from any aesthetic character, exerts on our whole organism, on the nervous system in particular, an influence such that we could use these effects as means of cure for various diseases. This physiological action is therefore certain; the animals themselves, at least a few, feel them to a certain extent. However, given our degree of culture, we no longer attach much importance to this order of phenomena. When we say that we are sensitive to music, we only hear about the moral or intellectual impressions it produces in us: the rest does not affect us much.
This question, infinitely more obscure, is more difficult to decide. As long as the music instrumental had no existence of its own, it did not arise. The constant union of poetry with music explained everything; it was not even conceivable that music could exist alone and delivered to its only resources. As the poetic rhythm, the measure or the rhyme are inseparable from the thought which they translate, thus the music which one joined there seemed only another means of increasing the intensity of expression, that the sense of words determined and clarified. Today, on the contrary, there are musical works conceived outside of any alliance of text: they seem to us neither less expressive, nor less significant than the others. Some, although there is some exaggeration there, flatter themselves to determine with more precision still the particular direction that