We propose in the following chapters to examine the most powerful non-æsthetic factors that have favoured the origin and development of the several art-forms. And while we are keeping in view especially such utilitarian requirements as those of intellectual information, of stimulation for work or war, of sexual propitiation or of magic efficiency, we shall be compelled to leave out of consideration all distinctively æsthetic factors and conditions. Accordingly we shall not be able to maintain in this historical and ethnological inquiry the strictest æsthetic distinctions. But we hope that the unavoidable vagueness in our terminology will not obscure those limitations and demarcations which have—perhaps even too laboriously—been laid down in the first part of this work. To preserve consistency between our inquiries into the abstract and the concrete origins of art, it need only be stated, once and for all, that the several works and manifestations, as they are to be treated hereafter, are, strictly speaking, only the raw material of art, if art is to be considered in the purest sense as an autotelic activity.
CHAPTER XII
ART AND INFORMATION
It is well known that, in the earlier classical times, philosophy, history, and science were inseparably connected with poetry. And it is as familiar a truth that pictographs and ideograms were used for writing before phonetic signs had been invented. But it is not enough to recall that poetry and the arts of design have in this way been serving the requirements of intellectual information; it can also be shown that among primitive tribes every one of the lower art-forms—the dance, the pantomime, and even the ornament—has been of great importance as a means of interchanging thoughts.
When attempting in this chapter to take a cursory survey of the various art-forms as used for purely intellectual purposes, we find it most advantageous to start with the dramatic examples. It is true that the art of the theatre, in the modern sense of the word, must be considered as a late, perhaps even as the very latest, result of artistic evolution. A literary drama, which fulfils all the claims of a work of art, is possible only on a highly advanced level of culture, and it has consequently by most authors on æsthetic been considered as the latest of all art-forms.[175] When dealing, however, with the productions of primitive tribes, we have to adopt a lower æsthetic standard. Although we do not meet with any tragedies, nor even with any real comedies, at this stage of evolution, we can at least point to the fact that simple farces, pantomimes, and pantomimic dances are to be found among tribes which have so far been unable to create any kind of epics, and whose lyrical poetry is restricted to a few rhythmical phrases with no intrinsic meaning. And if we use the word in its widest sense, so as to include every representation by action, drama can be spoken of as the very earliest of all the imitative arts. It was certainly in use long before the invention of writing, either by pictures or letters; perhaps it is even older than language itself. As an outward sign of thought, action is more immediate than words. Dramatic communication does not even presuppose any conscious intention nor any common consent. It may appear on the side of the “speaker” as the unchecked result of the “Einhaltsstreben,” the universal impulse to put into gesture any idea of action which is distinctly conceived—for instance to clench the fist at the thought of striking—and it may be comprehended without any effort by the audience, which by unconscious imitation partakes of the communicated thoughts.[176] Such pantomimic forms of intellectual exchange seldom indeed occur in civilised life. The “Einhaltsstreben” in a civilised man is generally lost during the transfer from thought to word. Pantomimic display, which involves an unnecessary waste of force and time, was doomed to disappearance with the growing development of conventional language. Moreover, the rules of propriety tend to confine, at least in educated society, the language of the body within as narrow limits as possible. But as soon as, by pathological influences, these conditions are annulled, even civilised man necessarily falls back upon pantomimic language. In the extreme forms of aphasia we may thus observe how strong the mimetic impulse is when unchecked. There is the more reason to consider these pathological instances as in some degree typical of the primeval methods of communication, as it is only by assuming an earlier system of impulsive, self-interpreting signs that we can explain the subsequent development of conventional word or gesture-language.[177]
We cannot, however, argue from cases of mental disturbance as to the original language of primitive man. For example, even if aphasia could be considered as a case of atavism,[178] we could scarcely compare the mimic capabilities of modern man with those of the unknown, wordless being whose system of expressive signs, although he were compelled to rely exclusively upon it, cannot possibly have been brought to any great degree of perfection. Illustrations from deaf-mutes and from the isolated specimens of “homo sapiens ferus”—Mr. Kipling’s Mowgli—are for the same reason inadequate.[179] As long as ethnology is ignorant of any wordless tribes, our notions as to the assumed dramatic language rest entirely upon psychological deductions.[180] But the probability of these deductions is, more or less, supported by what we know about the lowest tribes now existing. It is true that the information on this point is even more inconsistent than is usual in ethnological evidence. But although due allowance must be made for the errors into which a deficient knowledge of the primitive custom and languages has led the various authors, there will nevertheless remain a sufficient body of facts proving the important part which pantomimic communication plays in the lower stages of mental evolution. Bushmen, Australians, and Eskimos show us a highly developed dramatic language.[181] In some parts of Australia it has been noticed that the store of gestures is richest among tribes which have enjoyed the least contact with Europeans.[182] And a further ground for considering this mode of thought-conveyance as old and primitive is afforded by the fact that, according to Mr. W. E. Roth, its “use is strictly enforced on certain special occasions, such as some of the initiation ceremonies.”[183] Mr. Fraser also believes that gesture-language is taught at the Bora ceremonies.[184]
It would, however, be presumption to see in every instance of dramatic thought-communication a rudiment of an old and primitive language. There are many causes which favour the adaptation and elaboration of mimic language even after a system of phonetic signs has been established. In a passage which has already been quoted Mr. Roth observes that pantomimic ideograms must be very advantageous “on the war-path or the chase, where silence is so essential an adjunct to success.”[185] Another reason still more important is the fact that pantomimic action can be understood by people who speak different languages. Among civilised nations we may find many instances of the high state of development which gesture-language has attained in border countries where different peoples must necessarily often meet.[186] And it is significant that among primitive tribes gestures and motions are nowhere so full of significance and intellectual expressiveness as on the plains of Australia,[187] among the savages in the interior parts of Brazil,[188] and on the great prairies of North America,[189]—in a word, in countries where the breaking up of a nation into small vagrant tribes has been the cause of an extreme dialectical disseverance. Under these conditions, however, the impulsive, self-interpreting pantomime is apt to develop gradually into an elaborate system of conventional signs. The gesture-language of the North American Indians, for example, which consists almost entirely of abbreviated “moves” of indication and delineation, is no doubt eminently adapted to fulfil the practical requirements of comprehensibility and explicitness. But it has not much to do with dramatic art in any sense of the word.
Of a more immediate importance for art-history are the pantomimics which accompany public speaking. In a state of society where every member is entitled to take part in the common deliberations, oral language will often prove an inadequate vehicle of thought. Only through displaying his speech in action is the chief or the priest capable of making its purport comprehensible to the large audiences at a popular meeting. Rhetoric, therefore, is still among many primitive tribes what it used to be in classical antiquity—a dramatic as well as a literary art.[190]
A pantomime will, of course, by virtue of its greater vividness, convey its content of thoughts and feelings with a far greater efficiency than a merely spoken oration. It may, when especially infectious, induce the audience to join in it as a dramatic chorus. And even when the imitation which it calls forth remains purely internal, this imitation, nevertheless, enables the spectators to appropriate the text of the acted oration in a way which is deeper and far more complete than could ever be possible with regard to an oral speech. As a natural sign of emotion pantomimic language opens, as Home would say in his quaint way, “a direct avenue to our heart.”[191] It is no wonder, therefore, that dramatic performances on all but the highest stages of culture have been used for political agitation as well as for religious edification.[192]
We shall in the following pages, when treating of the religious and political aspects of art, obtain a fitting opportunity of examining these forms of drama. In the present connection we need only refer to them as means of further emphasising the utilitarian aspect of mimic representation in the intercourse between savages. After having realised how on the lower stages of culture practical advantages as well as social and religious considerations concur in favouring the development of this early language, we may understand the surprisingly high dramatic ability of primitive peoples. But while psychological as well as sociological reasons thus confirm us in considering dramatic action as the earliest means of conveying intellectual information, we are nevertheless compelled to admit that even in primitive stages the other art-forms also may have served this purpose. In reality it is impossible to draw any sharp distinction between dumb-drama and primitive poetry. The pantomimic performance will in most cases spontaneously supplement itself with a recital, spoken or sung. In the simple representations therefore of real occurrences which characterise the lowest forms of narrative art these two means of intellectual expression generally appear together.
And in this connection one will also meet with an early manifestation of pictorial art in the form of an extempore design, which serves to bring out more fully and clearly the content of the recital. The transition from a delineative gesture to a contour-design is indeed so direct and easy that it must have taken place even among tribes on a very low plane of culture. In some instances we can distinctly see how the one art grows out of the other. Mr. Mallery has described a dialogue between some Alaskan Indians, in which the left hand is used as an imaginary drawing board upon which lines are drawn with the index finger of the right hand.[193] Herr von Steinen has observed that the natives in Central Brazil, as soon as the gestures prove insufficient for conveying an idea, fashion an explanatory design in the sand.[194] These designs are only a projection on a different surface of the hand-movements with which in their pantomimic language they describe the outlines of the objects in the air. One is tempted, therefore, to find in these transferred gestures the origin of pictorial art. And such an hypothesis seems the more probable as in some tribes—particularly among the North American Indians—the picture-signs for denoting things and phenomena have evidently been derived from the corresponding gesture-signs.[195] But it is, as Professor Groos cautiously remarks, difficult to know whether any primitive man could ever have thought of delineating the contours of an object had he not beforehand possessed some idea of drawing.[196] Without endeavouring to solve this question of origins, it is sufficient for our purpose to state that a kind of extempore design, almost as spontaneous and fugitive as the dramatic art, appears together with the mimic and poetic representations. And we have now only to devote our attention to these various means of information in so far as they may give rise to a manifestation of art, while serving the purely intellectual purpose of conveying or elucidating a thought-content.