Theory Of Music In Ancient Chinese Philosophy — страница 8

  • Просмотров 666
  • Скачиваний 6
  • Размер файла 32
    Кб

time, they longed for the ancients and sighed with admiration. This is the way they deluded later generations.” The critique of the Confucianism’s claim that only sage king and sage fully appreciate music is an attempt to undermine and blunt the political motive of Confucianism that purorts to use music as a ruling tool. This critique is another denunciation of secular, desire-oriented Confucianism that attempts to beautify the rule of the ruling class as an embodiment of sage king’s rule. Concurrently, this critique provides a new interpretation that will broaden aesthetical horizon. His music theory confirms that not only sage king and sage, but all of the people can have their own sense of appreciation and understanding of music. This critique also makes it possible that

music arrangement becomes one of many artistic forms. Music arrangement is not to distort the original nature of original song. Arranged music is recognized as a legitimate form of music that arouses aethetical sense drawn from a change in its pitches and tunes. In his 3rd debate, Jikang refutes the claim that music does intimate the personality of sage king. If music is to represent the nature of a sage king as a composer and carry the emotions of him, then Perfect Music could not be entrusted to professional music performers: we must have a sage to pull on the strings and blow on the pipes. Only then will these elegant songs achieve their perfect form. Yet, now as it is in the past, music is performed by professional performers and this itself proves that music does not

intimate the personality of sage king. Yet, Jikang’s refutation can be also refuted by Confucianism. By extending Confucianism’s position, Jikang’s refutation can be countered by a new interpretation which posits that if music already intimates the personality of sage king, the true nature or meaning of music can be tranmittable only if performance of music is fully executed. Further, if the performer is moved and performs music to the full while following up on the intention of sage king, he/she can transmit the motive of sage king. Hence, if actual performance of music and the role of the performer fully correspond to the motive of sage king, the intention of sage king in music composition can be truly and sufficiently transferred. II-C. A Critique of the viewpoint of

fixed correspondence between emotion and sound Confucianism claims that the sound of music carries the meaning and emotion of humans. In an attempt to substantiate this claim, the guest from Jin takes the example of “GeLu” who knew that his cow grieved and bellowed her lament to him that her calves had been sacrificed. As to this case, Jikang criticizes every aspect of the implication of it. He simply says that cattle are not of the same species as man. In other words, there are no paths of communication between the two. His cut-throat refutation is as follows: if birds and animals are both able to speak and GeLu received a special talent by which he alone could understand them, then this is a case of discussing their affairs by interpreting their language, like translating

and transmitting a foreign tongue. Since it is not a matter of knowing someone’s feelings by examining their music, this is not a valid criticism of my position. In Confucianism, “if some who is wise will thoroughly understand something as soon as he comes into contact with it, and that there is nothing he will not know.” Jikang ,however, is keenly doubtful of this claim and as a counterargument. He continues by asking whether, if a sage all of a sudden found himself in the lands of the Hu barbarians, “would he understand their language or not?” As to this doubt, Jikang sets out his analysis of knowledge by saying the following. Must he have repeated contact and exchange with them, and then get to know their language ? Or, will be blow on the pitch-pipes and play the

bamboo tuning tubes and in this way examine their music ? Or, will he observe their manner and examine their facial expressions and in this way know thir minds ? This (the latter) would be a matter of knowing one’s mind naturally from his air and appearance. Even though he himself said nothing, you could still know his mind. Thus the way of knowing does not perhaps rely on words. If you can blow on the pitch-pipes and examine their music, and in this way know their minds, then even if someone had his mind on a horse but by mistake said ‘deer,’ the examiner would definitely know from ‘deer’ that he meant ‘horse’. This means that one’s mind is not related to what one says: and what one says is perhaps not sufficient to verify what is on his mind…. Language is not