MR. HAWEM ON MUSIC AND MORALS.*
Tins is a somewhat heterogeneous and unequal book. It is full of pleasant reading, and contains many good criticisms and de- scriptions; but its theories are often very questionable, and its surveys of fact omit much that is essential to the ground surveyed. A large part of the volume has, we believe, already appeared in magazines, and the author has attempted to give a connected form to his materials by grouping them in four "books," headed respectively "Philosophical," "Biographical," "Instrumental," and "Critical ; " but the various elements do not form a har- monious whole. The first " book " is, however, of a much higher character than the others, and is meant to strike the key-note of the wet k, its sub-title being" Music, Emotion, and Morals." It is put forth as a contribution to the much-neglected study of Musical Psychology," and is so genuine an attempt in that direction that we welcome it as a sign of life, although widely dissenting from its conclusions.
Mr. newels begins by contrasting the sister arts of painting and music, observing that while "Nature gives man the art of painting, as it were, ready made," she gives to the musician only "sound, not music. Nowhere does there fall upon his ear, as he walks through the wide world, such an arrangement of con- secutive sounds as can be called a musical subject, or theme, or melody. Far less does he find anything which can be described as musical harmony." The cuckoo "is the nearest approach to music in nature." Now, at the very outset we must protest against these statements as being greatly exaggerated. There are many birds whose songs strictly deserve the appellation of melody. To this well-known fact the present writer can bear personal witness, and will be happy to produce a melody duly noted down some
* Music end Morals. By the Rev. 11.1t. Loudon: Strahan and
Co. 1871.
years ago from the song of a blackbird who then haunted certain elm trees in Hampstead. Musical harmony in nature is of course much rarer than melody, but there is a grand oak-tree group at Battle Abbey which in high autumn winds does certainly give forth a succession of glorious chords, difficult to define without the aid of musical notation, but of a character which no true musician's ear could fail to recognize as every now and then attaining musical definiteness. The problem is a simple one, and depends on these questions :—(1.) Are any of the sounds of nature produced by that number of vibrations in a second which is necessary to make the sound a musical note? (2.) If such notes are to be heard in nature, are they ever produced in the succession called melody ;- or (3), in the combination called harmony ? To the first two of these questions affirmative replies may be undoubtedly given ; the third is not so easily answered, but Mr. Haweia's negative is far too absolute. Of course no one would maintain that the music of nature bears the same relation to the human art of music that the scenery of nature bears to the art of painting. But the music of nature is an initial stage which ought not to be ignored, nor can we understand how any musician can fail to recognize and eajoy it.
Next comes the kernel of our author's system. He holds that " Music is the language of the emotions," being "atone time their minister expressing them, at another their master commanding them." But he maintains that no "definite images, or even thoughts, are indispensable to the existence of emo- tion." Quito otherwise : " emotion is often weakened by association with thought, whereas thoughts are always strengthened by emotion." "Thought is dead without emotion, whereas emotion has a life of its own entirely independent of thought. Thoughts are but wandering spirits that depend for their vitality upon the magnetic currents of feeling." Nay, " once raise a thought to its highest power, and it not only is accom- panied by the strongest emotion, but, strange to say, actually passes out of the condition of a thought altogether into the con.- dition of an emotion," as hard metal into subtle gas. This is the underlying idea of Mr. Haweis's whole musical universe, and it is one from which we strongly dissent. When he says that "thought is dead without emotion," what sort of thought does he refer to? Abstract propositions or bald statements of fact, such as " Life is short" or "Man has two eyes," do not neces- sarily suggest emotion, but neither can they be called dead. Again, while it is true that, to a certain extent, emotion has a life of its own which is independent of thought, it is just as much (and as imperfectly) true that thought has a life of its own which is independent of emotion. In fact, no spiritual existence which truly deserves to be called " life " can be without both, for they are but the inseparable obverse and reverse of one reality. It would sometimes appear as if Mr. flaweis employed the term " emotion " as a sort of general term to denote every phase of con- sciousnese that is not distinctively and exclusively intellectual, but on the whole, he really does mean by " emotion " what the word is usually held to convey, and he thus undoubtedly narrows the sphere of musical life.
Following in this direction, our author goes on to maintain that to set words to music is "to mix two arts together. On the whole, a striking effect may be produced but in reality it is at the expense of the purity of each art. Poetry is a great art ; so ie. music ; but as a medium or emotion each is greater alone than in company, at though various good ends are obtained by linking the two together, providing that the words are kept in subor- dination to the greater expression-medium of music." This notion is a legitimate result of our author's non-perceptiou of the true mutual relations of thought and emotion, and we can only regard it as a grievous heresy. Poetry and music are art-media for the expression of lafe, not only of emotion. There is much poetry which is not lyrical, and can- not be made so by any artificial "setting to music ;" and there is much music which has arisen independently of poetry, though not of thought, and is complete as it stands, and in these cases we see specimens of "the pure art." So, too, we may see the special characteristics of manhood and of womanhood manifested in separate unrelated souls, and may regard each as a distinct type of spiritual existence. But it is none the less true that the union of two of these separate souls that are really fitted for each other- brings out new powers in each, and gives rise to a fuller and completer state of existence than either would enjoy alone. This is exactly what takes place in that which Mr. Haweis ignominiously denominates "the mixed art," when truly lyrical poetry has been worthily wedded to its musical better-half. Who, for instance, knows the full meaning of Isaiah's words, "For, be -hold I darkness shall cover the earth," &a., that is not familiar with Handel's musical rendering of them? Can any mere words ever express the ineffable peace breathed forth in Spohr's "Blest are the departed"? On the other hand, how inadequate would be even the brilliant dramatic music of Elijah and the Walpurgis :Night to bring the scenes before us, were it not for the definite poetical utterances to which the music gives such rich and full ex- pressiveness? In all these instances, and in countless others, the music is not merely "set" to the words, but the poetic thought is absorbed into the composer's genius, and born afresh as a new reality, in which the poetry and the music are virtually one. Still more distinctly are the mutual relations between the two arts illustrated by the cases of failure in which the music has not been " married to immortal verse." In Handel's oratorios, for instance, the music invariably rises or sinks with the character of the words, ranging from the divine down to the common-place, and from thence to the absolutely stupid, according to the inspiration of his poetry ; yet Handel's genius was of the very highest. The case of Mendelssohn points the same moral in a yet nobler manner. Ms artistic conscience would not let him compose for unsuitable words, even at the desire of anxious friends, or of the King whom he truly wished to please. "It is just as if I were to utter a false- hood," he wrote on one of these occasions ; "for notes have as dis- tinct a meaning as words, perhaps even a more definite sense." A clearer testimony could not be borne to the truth and nobleness of ." the mixed art."
Having thus discouraged music from being too much influenced by thought, Mr. Haweis finishes by forbidding her to enter upon the sphere of action. Music, he says, can only express the emo- tions caused by action, and cannot describe the actions themselves, and he therefore objects to the opera in toto, and to all descriptive music. But in his admiration for the dramatic music of Elijah, he -either forgets his canon or brings his "emotion caused by action" so very near to the painting of the actions themselves as virtually to contravene his principles. Of those principles be gives a curious illustration by suggesting that eventually a "Colour-Art" may arise which shall be independent of form,—an art which will, he thinks, be a truer counterpart of music than painting can be. He could not have given a clearer proof of the radical imperfection of his theory of music than this twin-ideal. Mr. 'Imola has, however, too genuine an appreciation of the actual realities of music to be wholly consistent with these anarchical theories. He clearly dis- cerns the variety of intellectual and spiritual rank that charac- terizes the different schools of music, and prefers the German school for its philosophical as well as for its artistic superiority over the others. But the general good-sense and te3thetic discri- mination shown in his criticism of concrete realities render it the more necessary to point out the questionable character of his abstract theories.'
The "Biographical" section is rather a patchwork. Handel -receives a pretty full biography ; after which follow sketches of Gliick, Haydn, Schubert, Chopin, and (apparently as an after- thought) remarks upon Mozart, Beethoven, and Mendelssohn. The observations on Mendelssohn are not felicitous, and are likely to give a somewhat distorted idea of him to readers who are not :acquainted with his life and letters. We cannot pass by the statements that although his relations with his wife " appear to have been tender and satisfactory," "yet her name is hardly ever mentioned in any letter or book of reminiscence -that has yet appeared," and that except "in some letters written very soon after their marriage, Mendelssohn does not allude to her in his published correspondence." Mr. Benedict's memoir of Mendelssohn, which is largely drawn from personal recollections, makes frequent and satisfactory mention of her, and in Mendelasohn's published correspondence there are many refer- ences to her up to the last year of his life. Tim preface to the latter -volume of his letters adds, moreover, that "the minute details of the pure and elevated happiness which Mendelssohn enjoyed in his most intimate domestic relations are expressly withheld, as being the peculiar treasure of his fainily,"—a decision most honourable to all -concerned. Far from regretting, with Mr. Haweis, that "there era pages in Mendelssohn's life which have never been filled up," we are thankful that the most sacred of those pages have not been laid open to the public gaze.
The third book ("Instrumental '') treats of violins, pianofortes, and church bells, and the fourth book is devoted .to a criticism of
"Music in England." This is so very superficial and rapid that It is little more than a catalogue raisonne, except when the author
waxes satirical upon the follies of amateurs, the ignorance of listeners, and the general incompetence of the British nation in matters of art. Much that he says on these heads is doubtless true, but he has scarcely done justice to the many facts which can be alleged on the other side. To English music) altogether, past and present, he is, indeed, far from just. He calls Purcell "largely French," whereas a more thoroughly Anglo-Saxon musician never existed ; and he passes by the vast stores of English music for the church, the stage, and the chamber which we owe to Purcell, Tallis, Farrant, Morley, Wilbye, &c., with the strange remark that "all these men have one thing in common, —they were composers in England, they were not English com- posers." This narrows the ground, to begin with. But what does our author say of the modern English composers who, with vary- ing degrees of merit, certainly represent a genuine vein of English musical genius?—for instance, Sir H. R. Bishop, John Barnett, G. A. Macfarren? He ignores them altogether, and confines his history of "Music in England" to the various societies or modes of executing music which have sprung up in this country during the last thirty years. His narrative is entertaining enough, but it is no history of " Music in England."
There is so much that is excellent in this volume that we are sorry to have been obliged to dwell BO prominently on its weak points. We had marked for extract a beautiful passage describing the church bells of Belgium, where " day and night are set to music," which would have given our readers a specimen of Mr. Haweis's appreciative and descriptive powers ; but our space for- bids, and we can, therefore, only express a parting hope that we may meet our author in future on some ground that shall admit of more harmonious agreement than his present volume.
Previous page
