Poetry, Music, and Dance
Architecture, painting, and sculpture are objective and static.  These arts above all express forms, and their universality lies in the  objective symbolism of these forms.
        Poetry, music, and dance  are subjective and dynamic. These arts first and foremost express essences, and  their universality lies in the subjective reality of these essences.
        Music distinguishes  essences as such and does not, like poetry, distinguish their degrees of  manifestation. Music can express the quality of “fire” without being able to  specify—since it is not objective—whether it is a question of visible fire, of  passion, of fervor, or the flame of mystic love, or of the universal fire—of  angelic essence—from which all these expressions are derived. Music expresses  all this at one and the same time when it gives voice to the spirit of fire,  and it is for this reason that some hear the voice of passion and others the corresponding  spiritual function, angelic or Divine. Music is capable of presenting countless  combinations and modes of these essences by means of secondary differentiations  and characteristics of melody and rhythm. It should be added that rhythm is  more essential than melody, since it represents the principial or masculine  determination of musical language, whereas melody is its expansive and feminine  substance.
        The angelic essences  have been compared to streams of pure water, of wine, of milk, of honey, and of  fire; they correspond to so many melodies, so many musical categories.
  ***
  Poetry should express with sincerity a beauty of the soul; one  might also say: “with beauty, sincerity.” It would serve no purpose to make so  obvious a point but for the fact that in our days definitions of art have  become increasingly falsified, either through the abuse of attributing to one  art the characteristics of another, or by introducing into a definition of one  art, or of all art, perfectly arbitrary elements such as a preoccupation with  its date; as though the value or lack of value of a work of art could depend on  the knowledge of whether it is modern or ancient, or on one’s believing it to  be ancient if it is modern or vice versa.
        Contemporary poetry is  mostly lacking in beauty and sincerity; it is lacking in beauty for the simple  reason that the souls of the poets—or rather of those who fabricate what takes  the place of poetry—are devoid of it, and it is lacking in sincerity on account  of the artificial and paltry searching for unusual expressions which excludes  all spontaneity. It is no longer a question of poetry but of a sort of cold and  lifeless work of jewelry made up of false gems, or of a meticulous elaboration  which is at the very antipodes of what is beautiful and true. Since the muse no  longer gives anything, because it is rejected a priori,—for the last thing which a man of today would accept is to appear  naïve,—vibrations are provoked in the soul and it is cut into fragments. 
        Whatever the caprice of  the moment, it is illogical to cultivate a non-poetical poetry and to define  poetry in terms of its own absence.
        
  ***
  A finite image of  Infinity:
  This is the purpose of all  poetry.
  All human work to its last  limits tends;
  Its Archetype in Heaven  never ends.
  What is the sense of  Beauty and of Art?
  To show the way into our  inmost Heart—
To listen to the music of  the Sky:
  And then to realize: the  Song was I.
*** 
  All that has been said above also applies in one way or another  not only to poetry but also to music: here again some people arrogate to  themselves the right to call realistic or sincere anything which, they say,  “expresses the spirit of our age,” when the reality to which they refer is only  a factitious world from which they can no longer escape: they make a virtue of  this incapacity and then disdainfully apply the label of “romanticism” or  “nostalgia” to that innate need for harmony which is proper to every normal  man. Ultramodern music—“electronic music” for example—is founded on a despising  of everything that enters into the very definition of music, as is moreover  also the case, mutatis mutandis, of the poetic art; it becomes no more than a  system of sounds—miserably fabricated—which violates the principle at the basis  of it. There is no possible justification for this puerile mania for “making a  clean sweep” of centuries or millennia in order to “start from scratch,” to  invent new “principles,” new bases, new structures, for such invention is not  merely senseless in itself but also incompatible with any creative sincerity.  In other words some things are mutually exclusive: no one can call forth a poem  from his heart while at the same time inventing out of nothing a language in  which to express it. Here, as with the visual arts, the initial error is belief  in a quasi-absolute originality, that is, in something which does not answer to  any positive possibility, the musical sense of a racial or traditional  collectivity not being capable of a modification extending to its very roots.  People talk about liberating music from this or that prejudice, or convention,  or constraint; what they really do is to “liberate” it from its own nature just  as they have “liberated” painting from painting, poetry from poetry, and architecture  from architecture; surrealism has “freed” art from art just as by execution a  body has been freed from life.
        This allusion to music  obliges us to draw attention to the fact that at the time of the Renaissance  and in the following centuries the decadence of European music and poetry was  incomparably less—if indeed there was any decadence or to the extent there  was—than that of the plastic arts and of architecture; there is no common  measure between the sonnets of Michelangelo and the works for which he is more  famous, or between Shakespeare or Palestrina and the visual art of their day.  The music of the Renaissance, like that of the Middle Ages of which it is a  continuation, expresses in sound what is great and chivalrous in the European  soul; it makes one think of wine or mead and of stirring legends of the past.  The reason for this disproportion between the arts is that intellectual  decadence—decadence of contemplative, not of inventive, intelligence—is far  more directly manifested in the visual arts, in which elements of  intellectuality are strongly involved, than in auditive or “iterative” arts,  which chiefly exteriorize the many and various states—and in the event the  beauties—of that plastic substance which is the soul. In the plastic arts and  in architecture the Renaissance is the art of passion and megalomania; the Baroque,  is the art of dreams. In music, the Baroque exteriorizes what may be lovable,  tender, or paradisal in the dream, whereas in the visual arts it manifests the  illusory and ludicrous aspects, enchantment coagulating into a nightmare. In  the nineteenth century romantic poetry and music reinforced and made more acute  the attachments to earth; like all sentimental individualism, this was a  terrible sowing of heart rending and sorrows, though in romanticism in the  widest sense there are still many beauties one would wish to see integrated  into a love of God.
        Whilst ancient music  included a spiritual value which can still be felt even in music of the end of  the eighteenth century, the plane of music changed at the start of the  nineteenth century so that it became in fact a kind of substitute for religion  or mysticism: more than in the profane music of the preceding periods musical  emotion came to assume the function of an irrational excuse for every human  frailty; music grew ever more hypersensitive and grandiloquent to the very  extent that everyday life was sinking into scientific rationalism and  mercantile materialism. But in general it was still real music, linked with  cosmic qualities and consequently capable of becoming, even if rarely, the  vehicle of a movement of the soul towards Heaven.
*** 
  Metaphysical or mystical poets such as Dante and some of the troubadours,  and also the Sufi poets, expressed spiritual realities through the beauty of  their souls. It is a matter of spiritual endowment far more than a question of  method, for it is not given to every man sincerely to formulate truths which  are beyond the range of ordinary humanity. Even if the concern was only to  introduce a symbolical terminology into a poem, it would still be necessary to  be a true poet in order to succeed without betrayal. Whatever one may think of  the symbolistic intention of the Vita Nuova or the Khamriyah (the “Song of Wine” by Umar ibn al-Farid) or the quatrains of Omar  Khayyam, it is not possible knowingly to deny the poetical quality of such  works, and it is this quality which, from an artistic point of view, justifies  the intention in question; moreover the same symbiosis of poetry and symbolism  is to be found in prototypes of Divine inspiration such as the “Song of Songs.”1 
*** 
  Visible forms manifest the heavenly essences by crystallizing  them; music in a certain fashion interiorizes forms by recalling their essences  through a language made of unitive sweetness and unlimitedness. Earthly music  evokes in the soul the transforming “remembrance” of heavenly music, although  with regard to this it may appear hard and dissonant.
        According to Pythagoras  and Plato, the soul has heard the heavenly harmonies before being exiled on  earth, and music awakens in the soul the remembrance of these melodies.
        Fundamentally, every love  is a search for the Essence or the lost Paradise; the gentle or overpowering  melancholy, which often appears in poetic or musical eroticism bears witness to  this nostalgia for a far-off Paradise, and doubtless also to the evanescence of  earthly dreams, whose sweetness is, precisely, that of a Paradise which we no  longer perceive, or which we do not yet perceive. Gipsy violins evoke not only  the heights and the depths of a love too human, they also celebrate, in their  profoundest and most poignant accents, a thirst for the heavenly wine that is  the essence of Beauty; all erotic music, to the extent of its authenticity and  nobility, rejoins the sounds, both captivating and liberating, of Krishna’s  flute, which is the very image of ascending, not descending, nostalgia;  sweetness of salvation, not of perdition.
*** 
  The psychological, and indirectly spiritual, quality of people  close to the soil—or to nature—is especially apparent in their music. In Europe,  the forms of folk music which are the most remarkable for their power and depth  are probably those of Spain and Russia, without forgetting certain medieval  survivals in other lands, for example in Auvergne, where the “bourrée” has kept  all the flavor of the Middle Ages. Mention should also be made of the  bag-pipes, an archaic instrument endowed with a strangely African or Asian tone  quality. In the greater part of Europe, the nineteenth century was fatal for  music, as it was for popular art in general. The accordion, that vulgar musical  machine, seems to have been expressly invented to destroy whatever is original,  noble, and profound in the popular soul.
***
  In the yellow man’s soul, which is little given to declamation,  the smallest things unveil their secret greatness: a flower, a cup of tea, a  precise and transparent brush-stroke; the greatness preexists in things, in  their primary truth. This is also expressed in the music of the Far East:  tinkling sounds which form beads like the spume of a solitary cascade in a kind  of morning melancholy; gong-strokes like the throbbing of a mountain of brass;  chants surging from the intimacies of nature, but also from the sacred, from  the solemn and golden dance of the Gods.
*** 
  The arts are related in diverse ways to the existential  conditions: thus, the plastic arts pertain to space, while poetry and music  pertain to time; poetry and music are auditive and “inward,” whereas painting,  sculpture, architecture are visual and “outward.” Dance combines space and  time, while summarizing the other conditions: form being represented by the  body of the dancer; number, by his movements; matter, by his flesh; energy, by  his life; space, by the extension that contains his body; time, by the duration  that contains his movements. It is thus that the Dance of Shiva summarizes the  six conditions of existence, which are like the dimensions of Maya,and a priori those  of Atma;if the Dance of Shiva,the Tandava,is said to bring about the  destruction of the world, this is because, precisely, it brings Maya back to Atma. And it is thus that all sacred dance brings the  accidents back to the Substance, or the particular, accidental, and  differentiated subject back to the universal, substantial, and one Subject;  this is moreover the function of music and, more or less indirectly, of all  inspired art; it is above all the function of love in all its forms, whence the  character intrinsically sacred—yet ambiguous under the reign of human decadence—of  love and the arts.
***
  There is the visual symbol and the auditory symbol, then the acted  symbol, all of which bring about the passage from the outward to the Inward,  from the accident to the Substance, and thereby also from the form to the  Essence.
        In a particularly  direct way, music and dance are supports for a passage—at whatever degree—from  the accident to the Substance; and this is above all the meaning of rhythm.
***
  Let us mention the very great importance among black peoples of drums,  whose function is central and quasi-sacred: they are the vehicle for rhythms  which, when communicated to human bodies, bring the whole being into contact  with cosmic essences. However paradoxical it may seem, it is the intelligence  rather than the body of the black man which is in need of rhythms and dances,  and that precisely because his spirit has a plastic or existential and not an  abstract way of approach; the body, for the very reason that it is the limit of  crystallization in the demiurgic process, represents “being” as opposed to  “thought,” or “our whole being” as opposed to our relatively particular  preoccupations or to our outward consciousness. The roll of drums marks, like  heaven’s thunder, the voice of Divinity: by its very nature and by its sacred  origin it is a “remembrance of God,” an “invocation” of the Power both creator  and destroyer and thus also liberator, through which human art canalizes the  divine manifestation and in which man participates through dancing; he thus  participates with all his being in order to regain the heavenly fluidity  through the “analogical vibrations” between matter and the Spirit. The drum is  the altar, its roll marks the descent of God, and the dance the ascent of man.
        We meet with the same symbolism  in dervish dances and, in principle, in every ritual dance. Love dances,  harvest dances, or war dances are designed to abolish the barriers between  different levels of existence and to establish a direct contact with the “genius”  or “divine Name” in question. Human infidelities do not in any way change the  principle or take away the value of the means: whatever may be the importance  given to utilitarian considerations or to magical procedures in the case of  some African animism or some Siberian or Red Indian shamanism, the symbols  remain what they are and the bridges towards heaven are doubtless never  altogether broken down.
        
  The magic power of a  sacred song,
  The thunder of a drum afar  one hears.
  The movement of the stars  is in the dance,
  The everlasting music of  the spheres.
Our inner truth needs to  be heard and seen:
  The dance means our deep  nature and its speech.
  Our body shows the language  of the Self;
  It lets us grasp what  thinking cannot reach.
                      
  Dancing is born of nature’s  inner part;
  From thence it comes, then  goes back to the Heart.
1 In an analogous manner, Jalal ad-Din Rumi introduced music and dance into Sufism, not out of invention, of course, but through inspiration.