The Spiritualist newspaper > No.231, January 26th 1877

Jan. 26, 1877
THE SPIRITUALIST,
41
intervals. No one can listen to an eloquent orator or preacher without
being struck with the truth of Mr. Spenser’s remarks. It is curious
how early in life the modulation of voice becomes expressive. With one
of my own children, under the age of two years, I clearly perceived that
his 11 humph ” of assent was rendered by a slight modulation, strongly
emphatic; and that, by a peculiar whine, his negative expressed
obstinate determination. Mr. Spencer shows that emotional speech in all
the above respects is intimately related to vocal music, and consequently to
instrumental music, and he attempts to explain the characteristic qualities
of both on “ the general law that a feeling is a stimulus to muscular
action.” It may be admitted that the voice is affected through this law,
but the explanation appears to me too general and vague to throw much
light on the various differences, with the exception of that of loudness,
between ordinary speech and emotional speech, or singing. This
remark holds good whether we believe that the various qualities of the
voice originated in speaking under the excitement of strong feelings, and
that the qualities have subsequently been transferred to vocal music ;
or whether we believe, as I maintain, that the habit of uttering musical
sounds was developed as a means of courtship in the early progenitors
of man, and thus became associated with the strongest emotions of
which they were capable, namely, ardent love, rivalry, and triumph.
That animals utter musical notes is a fact familiar to every one, as
we may daily hear in the singing of birds. It is a remarkable fact that
an ape—one of the Gibbons—produces an exact octave of musical sounds,
ascending and descending the scale by half-tones, so that this ape, as
Professor Owen says, “ alone of brute mammals, may be said to sing.”
From this fact, and from the analogy of other animals, I have been led
to infer that the progenitors of man probably uttered musical tones
before they had acquired the power of speech, and that consequently
when the voice is used under any strong emotion, it tends to assume,
through the principle of association, a musical character That
the pitch of the voice bears some relation to certain states of feeling is
tolerably clear. A person gently complaining of ill-treatment, or slightly
suffering, almost always speaks in a high pitched voice. . . . Laughter
may be either high or low in pitch, so that with men, as Haller long ago
remarked, the sound partakes of the character of the vowels 0 and A,
as pronounced in German, whilst with women and children it has more
of the character of E and I, and these latter vowels naturally have, as
Helmholz has remarked, a higher pitch than the former, yet both tones
of laughter equally express enjoyments or amusements.
In considering the mode in winch vocal utterances expres 1 he various
passions, emotions, and feelings of the soul, we are naturally led to
inquire into the cause of what is called “ expression” in music generally.
Upon this point, Mr. Litchfield, who has long attended to the subject
of music, has been so kind as to give me the following remarks:—
“The question ‘What is the essence of musical expression?’ (and of
course the question is equally applicable to expression by the human
voice or by an instrument), involves a number of obscure points, which,
so far as I am aware, are as yet unsolved enigmas. Up to a certain
point, however, any law which is found to hold good as to the expres¬
sion of the emotions, must apply to the more developed mode of expres¬
sion in song, which may be taken as the primary type of all music. A
great part of the emotional effects of a song depends upon the character
of the action by which the sounds are produced. . . . But this leaves
unexplained the more subtle and specific effect, which we call the
musical expression of a song, the delight given by the melody, or even
by the separate sounds which make up the melody. This is an effect
indefinable in language, one which, as far as I am aware, no attempt
has been made to analyse, and which the ingenious speculation of Mr.
Herbert Spencer leaves quite unexplained. For it is certain that the
melodic effect of a series of sounds does not depend in the least upon
their loudness or softness, or in their individual absolute pitch. The
purely musical effect of any sound depends upon its place in what is
technically called the * scale,’ the same sound producing absolutely dif¬
ferent effects upon the ear, according as it is heard in connection with
one or another series of sounds; It is on this relative association of the
sounds that all the essentially characteristic effects which are summed
up in the phrase ‘ musical expression’ depend. But why certain asso¬
ciations of sounds have such and such an effect is a problem which yet
remains to be solved.”
Now, all these remarks of Mr. Darwin, Mr. Herbert Spencer, and Mr.
Litchfield, in regard to the series or succession of sounds which produce
the music of song, apply, I think, undoubtedly, more or less to the
series or succession of sounds which produce the music of speech, or, in
other words, the inflection and modulation of the human voice.
Why words spoken in a certain key, descending, by a series of sounds,
in the musical scale, should convey to the mind the impression of stern,
determined will and command—as when a man, without even being seen,
in such a manner pronounces merely the four words “ Let me do this
and why the very same words, spoken in a different key, but with the
voice ascending in the musical scale, will convey the impression of
earnest entreaty or supplication, we cannot tell; at all events, in the
present state of knowledge to which we have arrived. But shall we
never be able to do so ? Are these indeed ultimate facts beyond which
we cannot go—mysteries that we can never penetrate ? The answer, I
fear, must be, that we must rest with the knowledge that the various
inflections and modulations of the human voice do produce certain
specific different impressions upon the mind and soul, and that the law
that such should be so is universal as regards all the races of mankind.
And now I think I have trespassed sufficiently long upon your attention
for this evening. In my next paper on this subject I propose entering
somewhat at length into an examination of the evidence on which I
venture to contend this general law of antithesis in the employment of
inflections and modulations of the human voice to express opposite
emotions of the soul is based, and, by appropriate illustrations from
passages expressive of such opposite emotions, to prove that this
hyp©thesis rests upon a true and firm foundation.
j THE PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN.
11 On Thursday night, last week, at the ordinary fortnightly meeting of
I i the Psychological Society, held at 11, Chandos-street, Cavendish-square,
); London, Mr. Serjeant Cox presided.
j I CLAIRVOYANCE NOT THOUGHT-READING-.
) i ' Mr. F. K. Munton, honorary secretary, read a communication from
Ai Mr. S. C. Hall, F.S.A., editor of the Art Journal, setting forth that in
|)i or about the year 1850 he dined with Mr. Lytton Bulwer, at Fulham;
I? 1 Lord Brougham was also one of the guests. The celebrated |clair-
i | voyant Alexis was expected, and when the hall bell rung Bulwer went to
|) | meet him, and took a handful of cards out of a tray and put them in his
i) I coat-tail pocket. He (Mr. Hall) saw him take the cards out of the
i( I tray. After dinner Bulwer put his hand in his pocket and said, “ Whose
II card am I holding now ?” Alexis replied, “ Mr. James Johnson’sh@
|)j (Mr. Hall) had forgotten the exact name, but the clairvoyant correctly
| (i read the name upon the card. Mr. Bulwer, until he produced it,
|j| did not know himself whose card it was. He did the same thing six or
|)| . seven times, always with the same accurate result. In every case Alexis
Kj gave the name correctly before Mr. Bulwer had taken the card from his
i|j pocket. In one case the same name was given twice, and there were
l| | two cards of that name in his pocket.
I)! THE PSYCHOLOGY OP THE HUMAN VOICE.
III Professor Plumptre then read a paper on the Psychology of the
I) I Human Voice, setting forth that emotional speaking was intimately
u! related to music.
|V| Mr. George Harris, F.S.A., said that although animals had no arti-
I;! culation, they could give great expression to their feelings, as in the
|( j case of the dog, for instance. Rooks had only one note, yet|could give
K i warnings of danger, and could almost talk to their young. Infants had
j) j the power of making their wants known by the tone of their voice. The
|( I most powerful language was that of passion.
isi Mr. Dunlop said that the association of ideas was one reason why
i) j particular sounds influenced the mind, as in the example where a
\h whistle was known to be a warning of danger. He had known such a
jy j sound, when successfully imitated, to send a tremor through a large
m body of men.
u j Mr. Spencer remarked that, besides the articulate voice, there was
i (1 an inarticulate voice, for when a man uttered a speech, he made it
j) i within his organism before he uttered it in words.
Mr. Hensleigh Wedgewood, M.R.I., said that Professor Plumptre’s
\{ j statement about pathetic appeals being accompanied by a rising sound,
I) I was exemplified in the whining of a dog.
; ! Mr. Serjeant Cox remarked, that some discussion had taken place in
vj that society as to the possession of two brains by man, and he wished
]) i to call attention to the circumstance that an interesting article on that
jc I subject had been published in the last number of the Cornhill Magazine.
jv To come to the subject before the meeting—Was it not possible that
1 | men were at one time nearer the position of animals than now, and
1(1 could only express their emotions by sounds, instead of by articulate
| | speech? Wagner held that it was possible by music to convey different
ideas, and even pictures, to the mind. For instance, he said he could
j(j produce a musical picture of a wood, and he had tried to do so. How
is! far he had succeeded in this, he (Mr. Serjeant Cox) could not say, but he
|) j had tried to find out what pictures Wagner had intended to convey without
I (i looking at the words; he could then discover when anger, love, and other
] s! passions were depicted, but he could not discover what were the ideas
|): Wagner tried to convey to the mind. Could animals communicate ideas ?
i (j It was a very important question, for it raised the problem whether
| (| ideas could be communicated from one mind to another without articulate
! j j speech. He thought that one animal could convey ideas to another,
i (j He knew a dog who would sometimes take out another dog, and they
is | would run on opposite sides of a hedge without either one of them tres-
1)1 passing where they had no business. One day this dog took out a
|(] strange dog, and kept that one in order just as if he had been accus-
| s j tomed to the duty; the new dog did not run off the land of the master of
i) j the other dog, and went through his work properly. Once he (Mr. Ser-
|(1 jeant Cox) had a pony which was blind, and to go from one field into
| s | another it had to pass through a narrow gateway in a very long fence;
1) I once when it desired to find this gateway a cow touched it, after which
|n the pony ran along quite freely, and the cow led it through the gate.
1 s i In this instance he thought that there was a communication of an idea,
]) I but there was certainly nothing of the nature of emotion. Was thought-
I) | reading a relic of the time when men had no articulate speech ? and had
| i j the power of thought-reading died away from non-usage ?
|)j Mr. Rowlands remarked that man’s soul was so fully expressed in
m his voice that a person could sometimes recognise the voice of a Mend
i (| whom he had not met for twenty years.
l) l ONE OP DR. CARPENTER’S INACCURACIES.
i) j Mr. Wedgwood said that Mr. Hall’s case, which their secretary had
jj l just read, did justice to a man who had been treated most unjustly by
m Dr. Carpenter in his lecture at the London Institution, for he told a
|)1 public audience that Alexis was an impostor..
in Mdlle. Ronniger remarked that every nation in its speech had an in-
iji flection of its own; she had resided some time in Denmark, where the
|)| people use a falling inflection, so that every speaker seems as if going
u j to cry. In Germany the Saxon has a singing voice.
K j Mr. Gordon thought that Mr. Serjeant Cox ought to give some
m authority for his assertion that Herr Wagner had attempted to show
K | pictures by music. At the present time if a man wished to pourtray the
j j most refined emotions, he did it by music; he should, therefore, have
|(| thought that the power of thought-reading was an advance upon the
i( i present state of man rather than a retrogression,
jvj Mr. Serjeant Cox said that he could vouch for the reality of the
| (i powers of Alexis. Once a party of physicians at Exeter tested Alexis.
It! One of them wrote to a friend at Tiverton asking him to write a-