Music and Its Relation to Other Arts

The exposition of the aesthetics of music is in a state of crisis, its development an arena for conflicting opinions, and its re capitulation a tough problem for the music-historian. The condition described as spiritual exists because the physical environments for systematic research in the philosophy of music have expanded rapidly during the last twenty-five years, particularly in departments of music linked by tradition to liberal art divisions within American colleges and universities. The arena has been created by administrators who have finally accepted music as a member of the Humanities and acknowledged it as a discipline worthy of scholarly pursuit. This act of restoration has subjected the art to critical examination by professional philosophers and aestheticians. As a consequence, certain superficialities of musical structure have been catapulted into the swiftly-changing stream of general aesthetic theory. Music-scholars have either been swamped by this flood or have hastily built dams to divert the waters from holy ground. The aesthetics of music is not a usual subject for reflection by the musician. Either he is too occupied with the performance, creation, and theory of music, or he lacks the ability to correlate the functions and significances of his art within a specialized area of reasoning. Today he is at the mercy of discursive writers on music who have contributed notably to his confusion. Therefore, the blame must not rest entirely on the professional philosopher or aesthetician who, in his present academic jurisdiction, considers the aesthetics of music as a mere corollary to a favorite theory of knowledge. If the premise of an aesthetic of music has not yet been clearly established, then the interpretation of the art in relation to other arts is also suspect.