"The Book" part III

I "must" have your comments on this, as it is probably the most important part of the book. The reason is because it is the one thing in the that nobody in music academia today is going to believe. It only used to be a truism. Now it is as vibrant as...well, I'll let you decide.


This should be sufficient to demonstrate that it is in the nature of music for
there to be a relationship between notes a fifth apart. So what? One could
totally disregard this, as Schonberg did, and the relationship would remain.
This note progression: C-Fsharp-Dsharp-G-Csharp-Gsharp-C, still incorporates
the relationship in a hidden, albeit real, form by its existence as members of a
scale based on the fifth motion. Similarly, the non-usage of the second
relationship does not necessarily deny its existence. One could also use
dissonance to deny the fact that a chord is an ordered arrangement of notes
around a center without actually contradicting the fact that such a thing
exists. How then, can reason compel us to any sort of ordered music?
Here is the answer to the question:

Is it important for music to behave as if
the perfect 5th relationship exists?

Obj. 1 It would seem that it is not necessary for music to behave in a manner which
brings out the perfect fifth relationship, for the musical scale already
contains the relationship implicit in its very makeup.

Obj. 2 One might argue that it is necessary for music to behave in the manner because
it gives the music a sense of direction and a logical method of proceeding. Is
the sense of direction really part of the music or is it merely psychological?
Why is the perfect fifth method the legitimate logical method of proceeding?

Obj. 3 It would even seem that it is good for things to behave in a way that would seem
to contradict their makeup, for example, a Twister ® champion is said to have a
talent, not a defect.

On the contrary: Although during the time of non-harmonic music the second was
given precedence and the fifth was somewhat ignored, as soon as both elements
could be incorporated together with harmony, the Catholic composers made music
behave in a manner that included the perfect fifth.

I answer that: In the making of anything chaos (the absence of order) must
always be avoided. Now in intervallic organization in music, on can organize
according to chaos or according to order. If a composer bases the music on any
intervals he likes, or on intervals according to extra-musical concerns, than
the music itself will most likely be chaotic, unless the composer’s will is not
as random as free will is likely to be. Alternately, the composer may state
that the music is based on a freely chosen interval, say, a tritone or a minor
third. Although the ensuing music will not be chaotic, the reason that it is
the way it is comes from freedom, not from reason, unless the based interval is
a perfect fifth or a major or minor second (the major or minor second are on a
par with the perfect fifth because it is self-evident that notes a second apart
have a relationship). Freedom is freedom to choose the good and the reasonable.
Consequently, it follows that music based on intervals other than fifths or
seconds is less good than music based on fifths or seconds. Such music is not
necessarily unbeautiful, but it is assuredly less beautiful. There is a
possibility that it is actually unbeautiful because it may be that music that
disregards the relationship actually denies it by its very existence, outside of
the perception of the listener.
It can further be demonstrated that the perfect-fifth is not only an essential
element in the finding of pitches (as has already been demonstrated) but is a
sort of aesthetic imperative that is supposed to drive pitched sound and make it
behave, not just exist, as if the relationship existed. The relationships of
fifth and octave are building-block relationships from which the pitch structure
of western music is made.# A human who behaves as if his cells do not exist
dies. A house that behaves as if its pieces do not exist falls down. Music
that behaves as if the perfect fifth does not exist ceases to be musical.
It could be objected that a scale could be constructed with any interval chosen
at random as long as this interval was used consistently. If this were done,
however, the second relationship would be distorted in the scale, destroying it
and making the music unmusical.

Ans. Obj 1: See paragraph two of “I answer that…”

Ans. Obj 2: It is irrelevant whether the sense of direction is merely
psychological.

Ans. Obj 3: If something behaves in a way that contradicts its makeup, it
ceases to be made of what it is made of and thus ceases to exist. Therefore, it
is impossible for anything to behave in a way that contradicts its makeup,
including a Twister champion.

That was a poor argument. This one is much better.

Obj. It seems that the perfect fifth has no necessary place in the behavior of
music, as, try as a composer might, unaided music cannot contradict the fact
that notes a fifth apart have a special relationship, as the relationship exists
whether it is incorporated into the music or not. Therefore, the perfect fifth
is a crutch that enables the composer to easily make pleasing sounds with less
thought as well as a limitation on the artist’s freedom.

On the contrary: Usage of the perfect fifth as a very significant musical
factor was frequent in the Age of Faith, while the most violent atheistic
musicians have denied its role. These are both important sighs of the aesthetic
merit of the interval.

I answer that: It would be absurd to suppose that each individual piece of
music did not possess its own essence: that one piece and another were just the
same identical essence of music with accidental qualities added. However, it
would be just as absurd to suppose that each individual piece of music did not
possess the essence of music, to some degree, despite the fact that each piece
has its own essence.
Now in the essence of music, it is clear that the relationship known as a
perfect fifth occupies some primacy of place, as it is the closest of all
relationships except the unison and the octave, intervals which have such
limited use and misuse that we need not consider them here. It is clear that
this relationship is essential to the nature of music because music is pitched
sound, and if the perfect fifth was not this prime relationship in pitched
sound, the nature of pitched sound would be different enough that the essence of
music would be substantially different from what it is.
Therefore, it is clear that each individual composition has two essences: that
of music in general and that of itself in particular. Further, it is clear that
the essence of music includes the primacy of place of the perfect fifth.
Now a perfect fifth can exist in music in two ways: that of melodic or harmonic
existence, and that of existence generally. For example, a C and a G played
simultaneously or consecutively have the first type of existence, while a C and
a G played at two random points in a piece have the second type. If we define
beauty as “The splendor of form (essence) shining upon matter.” (Jacques
Martrain), it is obvious that it is at least practically impossible that the
perfect fifth can not exist in a beautiful manner in the second sense. However,
music that does not incorporate it in the first sense as well, whether it be
thru chordal tonality or other means, has thus ignored a significant way of
letting the form of music in general shine its splendor upon matter. In fact,
one could make a case (although I doubt it could be proven) that one actually
goes so far as to commit an offense against music by composing music that has
behavior that behaves in a way that seems to contradict the relationship. In
summary, it can be proven that music that incorporates the perfect fifth into
its behavior is better than music that does not, although it cannot be proven to
the same degree of certainty that music that does not do so is bad music.

Reply to objection: Music, it is true, cannot contradict the relationship. It
can, however, ignore it, thus preventing beauty from shining through. Though
it may act as a crutch by accident, the true composer will work for beauty, not
accolade, and the pleasure of the audience will be but an accidental result of
his work with the perfect fifth. The last part of the objection is less
answerable, as the form of the individual piece of music is the artist’s
concern. However, the truly rational (and thus, truly free) artist will
consider that the form of music in general is God’s own form, while the form of
the individual piece is the artist’s addition. It is incredibly unlikely that a
form of the artist (indirectly God’s) would be superior to the form designed
directly by God, especially if the two were in conflict. Although the artist
may be right in putting the form he is discovering in the primary place, it
would be incredibly imprudent from an artistic perspective, unless the work had
some purpose it was supposed to fulfill.

Ending note: The second is not implicit in the makeup of the scale. One might
object that the scale is full of seconds, but a scale does not exist as a string
of seconds unless it is played in order. If it is not played in order, it
exists as something else. Here, scale is used to mean “a set of usable notes”
not what is meant by scale when musicians use it.
The merit of the second is self-evident, but it cannot and need not be proven by
the methods above.