If, for instance, a great musician composes a pastoral symphony does he
imitate the mooing of cows, the bleating of lambs, the rippling of
brooks? Such attempts would be recognized as cheap in the extreme.
“Very well,” the Cubist says, “if I paint a pastoral symphony why should
I so much as suggest cows, sheep, landscape, brook? Why should people
insist upon _seeing_ in my painting what they cannot _hear_ in Mozart’s
or Beethoven’s music?”
* * * * *
The comparison which Picabia is fondest of making is that with absolute
music. The rules of musical composition, he points out, are sufficiently
hampering in themselves to the composer’s mood, or call it inspiration.
Words, as of songs, still further confine his vision of melody, even
though they give in the beginning the impression that evokes the mood.
Songs without words, the expression of the impression made on him by a
great poem without the necessity of following in musical form the
literary form of the poet, leave him far freer, give his subjectivity
far wider scope. Modern composers have rebelled against the old fetters;
modern painters have begun to feel the same need of a freer, an absolute
method of expression. Hence, “post-impressionism,” which refuses
altogether to be bound by objectivity, by literal reproduction of the
object seen, in connection with the mood, the after-impression, received
and fixed on the canvas. A composer may be inspired by a walk in the
country, says M. Picabia, and produce a production of the landscape
scene, of its details of form and color? No; he expresses it in sound
waves, he translates it into an expression of the impression, the mood.
And as there are absolute sound waves, so there are absolute waves of
color and form. Modern music has won its way; this modern painting, too,
will find appreciation and understanding in the days to come.
* * * * *
The Cubists have set themselves a hard task. It is a good deal easier to
_sing_ an _emotion_ than _paint_ one. It is a good deal easier to
_paint_ an _object_ than _sing_ one--therein lies the trouble.
Yet in the beginning both music and painting were imitative. Music
imitated natural sounds; drawing and painting imitated natural objects.
But soon men began to sing for the pleasure of singing and play on
instruments for the pleasure of playing, and the imitation of natural
sounds was left far behind as primitive and elemental, and music tended
to become more and more expressive of emotions, elemental emotions at
first, finer and purer emotions later, until in the western world
abstract purity was reached in Beethoven.
Since Beethoven there has been a reaction to more imitative music, as in
the operas of Wagner.
While music departed farther and farther from imitation of natural
sounds, drawing and painting progressed toward the more perfect
representation of natural objects.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account