Nicolai

(das Zierliche). It seems to me that much of Mozart’s music incorporates both
”das Erhabene” and ”das Anmutige”. The latter quality is also abundantly present
in Der Rosenkavalier.
In Hartmann’s opinion absolute music is not capable of the comical. However,
”Doch selbst von der reinen Musik muss man sagen, dass sie in gewissen Werken
dem Komischen sehr nahe kommt: sie ist des Heiteren und Lustigen fähig, des-
gleichen des Launigen, Kapriziösen, Leichtfüssigen und Sprunghaften, ja des
Ausgelassenen und unbesorgt Leichtsinnigen. Ist es von dort nicht nur ein geringer
Schritt zum Komischen?” (P. 453.) But this should not lead us to think that music
is really comical. These qualities are more nearly associated with the gracious, and
thus we leave the realm of the comical.
Finally, a few words by way of commentary. One salient feature of Hartmann’s
philosophical outlook becomes apparent to anyone who has penetrated his works-
and that is that he is so overwhelmingly positive. There is little trace of scepticism
or pessimism in his practical philosophy (ethics and aesthetics). Hartmann also
recognizes absolute values and a value-hierarchy. One can not help but admire
the boldness of his value-intuitions, but there is undeniably a risk of dogmatism.
Any philosophy of musical evaluation which aspires to universality is bound,
in this day and age, to face insurmountable difficulties. Historians of music are
always evaluating-indeed, it would seem impossible to write a book on music
history and not do so. But they evaluate music within the same tradition. It seems
to us perfectly objective and convincing when a historian compares, say, a can-
tata by Telemann with one by Bach and finds the one by Bach to be greater;
or compares a violin concerto by Spohr with one by Mendelssohn, finding the
latter’s to be greater. All well and good. But enormous difficulties present them-
selves as soon as an attempt is made to evaluate in comparison two truly great
composers who are great in different ways. Take, for example, a comparison of
Mozart with Beethoven. One is the supreme embodiment of the elegant, playful,
dreamy, the profound; the other is the quintessence of the titanic, Faustian,
Dionysian. This is, of course, an over-simplification, since Mozart had a darker,
romantic side and Beethoven could be classical in his earlier works and meditative
in the later. Nevertheless, each master has produced the utmost in musical creation
within the aesthetic categories congenial to his spirit. And what passes for an
absolute value-judgment here may be in reality more an expression of the
affinity of the aesthetician’s psyche with one or other of the masters. Accordingly,
there is wide divergence of opinion.
Yet there are those who dare to be categorical and whose assertions may be
grounded in deeply penetrating value-intuitions. Despite these hazards, an onto-
logy of music in the Western tradition may be possible, but in consideration of
music after the turn of the twentieth century the investigation is complicated by
an unprecedented diversity of musical types and styles, many of which are suppor-
ted by their own theorerical systems. And reference is made here only to currents
within the modern ”serious” or art music-music which follows in the wake of
the Western tradition. It is just this diversity which makes comparative evaluation
so hard. Richard Strauss’s Vier letzte Lieder and Lars-Eirik Larsson’s Förklädd gud
on the one hand, and Karlheinz Stockhausen’s Gesang der Jünglinge on the other,
were composed only a few years apart.
Moreover, our musical culture today is permeated by various types of popular
and folk music-music which is consumed by the vast majority of the population
and much of which is genuine and ”serious”. And nowadays music from other
than Western cultures has achieved great popularity. It should be mentioned
in view of this, that Nicolai Hartmann confines himself exclusively to art in
Western civilization without thinking it necessary to even discuss or vindicate
that limitation. Furthermore, there is no discussion of theoretical systems of tonality
or atonality-aspects which are certainly relevant in a philosophical investigation
of music?
Our ”Weltanschauung” is characterized by a musical pluralism. Composers
and musicians the world over are all working within their particular styles, traditions,
and tone systems; they are expressing themselves and with their creations
giving people art-experience, pleasure, and entertainment. And not the least im-
portant in all this is the sheer joy in music-makmg, the ”spelgladje”. We just have
to switch on the radio to hear an electronic piece by Ralph Lundsten, Swedish
folk music, an Indian raga, or ABBA. And all these different traditions have
their own norms which are applied in musical criticism. Today all types of music
are reviewed regularly in the newspapers and a host of periodials has sprung up
to meet the growing need for information about all varieties of music.
Nicolai Hartmann’s view seems to be that the spiritual world of art, and more
specifically music, is a realm to which we can gain access, granted that we have
the sensitivity; a realm which we can evaluate objectively in intuitions gained
through emotional-transcendent acts. The fact that every experienced listener has
the conviction that his taste has become more mature and objective seems to
corroborate this view. This view of objective evaluation entails that it would thus
be possible, in the event of disagreement of other investigators, that one investi-
gator or some investigators could evaluate a musical work according to its true
value; know the truth and be right. Whereas the disagreeing investigators would
necessarily miss the mark and be wrong, since they lack the proper value-organ
or value-feeling. Sometimes one hears talk of the ”Weltanschauung” ”going” in
this or that direction, or that most authorities now recognize such and such com-
posers etc.-the assumption here being that whatever most authorities agree on
must be as close to what is right as is possible.
There is a general tendency in modern philosophy to attempt to establish
aesthetics as a scientific discipline. Indeed, Husserl wanted to ground philosophy
itself as a rigorous science (Philosophie als strenge Wissenschaft). And Hart-
mann makes the same claim for aesthetics (Ӏsthetik ist eine Art Erkenntnis,
3
There is currently going on a discussion of tonality in the USA. Leonard Bernstein in The
unanswered question (1976)-originally a series of lectures delivered at Harvard University in
1973-takes the following stand: ”On the one hand tonality and syntactic clarity; on the other,
atonality and syntactic confusion.” Bernstein is criticized by Allan Keiler in an article in The
musical quarterly (April 1978) entitled, ”Bernstein’s The unanswered question and the problem
of musical competence” (p. 195).