with reference to archilochus, it has been established by critical research that he introduced the folk-song into literature, and, on account thereof, deserved, according to the general estimate of the greeks, his unique position alongside of homer. but what is this popular folk-song in[pg 51] contrast to the wholly apollonian epos? what else but the perpetuum vestigium of a union of the apollonian and the dionysian? its enormous diffusion among all peoples, still further enhanced by ever new births, testifies to the power of this artistic double impulse of nature: which leaves its vestiges in the popular song in like manner as the orgiastic movements of a people perpetuate themselves in its music. indeed, one might also furnish historical proofs, that every period which is highly productive in popular songs has been most violently stirred by dionysian currents, which we must always regard as the substratum and prerequisite of the popular song.
first of all, however, we regard the popular song as the musical mirror of the world, as the original melody, which now seeks for itself a parallel dream-phenomenon and expresses it in poetry. melody is therefore primary and universal, and as such may admit of several objectivations, in several texts. likewise, in the na?ve estimation of the people, it is regarded as by far the more important and necessary. melody generates the poem out of itself by an ever-recurring process. the strophic form of the popular song points to the same phenomenon, which i always beheld with astonishment, till at last i found this explanation. any one who in accordance with this theory examines a collection of popular songs, such as "des knaben wunderhorn," will find innumerable instances of the perpetually productive melody scattering picture sparks all around: which in their variegation, their abrupt change,[pg 52] their mad precipitance, manifest a power quite unknown to the epic appearance and its steady flow. from the point of view of the epos, this unequal and irregular pictorial world of lyric poetry must be simply condemned: and the solemn epic rhapsodists of the apollonian festivals in the age of terpander have certainly done so.
accordingly, we observe that in the poetising of the popular song, language is strained to its utmost to imitate music; and hence a new world of poetry begins with archilochus, which is fundamentally opposed to the homeric. and in saying this we have pointed out the only possible relation between poetry and music, between word and tone: the word, the picture, the concept here seeks an expression analogous to music and now experiences in itself the power of music. in this sense we may discriminate between two main currents in the history of the language of the greek people, according as their language imitated either the world of phenomena and of pictures, or the world of music. one has only to reflect seriously on the linguistic difference with regard to colour, syntactical structure, and vocabulary in homer and pindar, in order to comprehend the significance of this contrast; indeed, it becomes palpably clear to us that in the period between homer and pindar the orgiastic flute tones of olympus must have sounded forth, which, in an age as late as aristotle's, when music was infinitely more developed, transported people to drunken enthusiasm, and which, when their influence was first felt, undoubtedly incited all the poetic means of[pg 53] expression of contemporaneous man to imitation. i here call attention to a familiar phenomenon of our own times, against which our ?sthetics raises many objections. we again and again have occasion to observe how a symphony of beethoven compels the individual hearers to use figurative speech, though the appearance presented by a collocation of the different pictorial world generated by a piece of music may be never so fantastically diversified and even contradictory. to practise its small wit on such compositions, and to overlook a phenomenon which is certainly worth explaining, is quite in keeping with this ?sthetics. indeed, even if the tone-poet has spoken in pictures concerning a composition, when for instance he designates a certain symphony as the "pastoral" symphony, or a passage therein as "the scene by the brook," or another as the "merry gathering of rustics," these are likewise only symbolical representations born out of music—and not perhaps the imitated objects of music—representations which can give us no information whatever concerning the dionysian content of music, and which in fact have no distinctive value of their own alongside of other pictorical expressions. this process of a discharge of music in pictures we have now to transfer to some youthful, linguistically productive people, to get a notion as to how the strophic popular song originates, and how the entire faculty of speech is stimulated by this new principle of imitation of music.
if, therefore, we may regard lyric poetry as the effulguration of music in pictures and concepts,[pg 54] we can now ask: "how does music appear in the mirror of symbolism and conception?" it appears as will, taking the word in the schopenhauerian sense, i.e., as the antithesis of the ?sthetic, purely contemplative, and passive frame of mind. here, however, we must discriminate as sharply as possible between the concept of essentiality and the concept of phenominality; for music, according to its essence, cannot be will, because as such it would have to be wholly banished from the domain of art—for the will is the un?sthetic-in-itself;—yet it appears as will. for in order to express the phenomenon of music in pictures, the lyrist requires all the stirrings of passion, from the whispering of infant desire to the roaring of madness. under the impulse to speak of music in apollonian symbols, he conceives of all nature, and himself therein, only as the eternally willing, desiring, longing existence. but in so far as he interprets music by means of pictures, he himself rests in the quiet calm of apollonian contemplation, however much all around him which he beholds through the medium of music is in a state of confused and violent motion. indeed, when he beholds himself through this same medium, his own image appears to him in a state of unsatisfied feeling: his own willing, longing, moaning and rejoicing are to him symbols by which he interprets music. such is the phenomenon of the lyrist: as apollonian genius he interprets music through the image of the will, while he himself, completely released from the avidity of the will, is the pure, undimmed eye of day.
[pg 55]
our whole disquisition insists on this, that lyric poetry is dependent on the spirit of music just as music itself in its absolute sovereignty does not require the picture and the concept, but only endures them as accompaniments. the poems of the lyrist can express nothing which has not already been contained in the vast universality and absoluteness of the music which compelled him to use figurative speech. by no means is it possible for language adequately to render the cosmic symbolism of music, for the very reason that music stands in symbolic relation to the primordial contradiction and primordial pain in the heart of the primordial unity, and therefore symbolises a sphere which is above all appearance and before all phenomena. rather should we say that all phenomena, compared with it, are but symbols: hence language, as the organ and symbol of phenomena, cannot at all disclose the innermost essence, of music; language can only be in superficial contact with music when it attempts to imitate music; while the profoundest significance of the latter cannot be brought one step nearer to us by all the eloquence of lyric poetry.
