Читать книгу The origins of art; a psychological & sociological inquiry - Y. Hirn - Страница 7

Table of Contents

The discussion of complex emotional states on which we enter in the present chapter will be subject to the same reservation as was our previous discussion of simple sensation-feeling. It is not proposed to attempt a definitive explanation of the nature of emotion, nor even to criticise the various emotion-theories which have been advanced in psychological literature. For the purposes of an æsthetic investigation we are only concerned with the external aspects, the outward manifestations, of mental states. We need not therefore dilate upon the controversies as to the exact relation between simple feeling and emotion. It is enough for us that all authors—those who consider pain and pleasure as elements sui generis as well as those who count them among sensations or emotions—agree in emphasising the prominent hedonic element which enters into all our emotions. Starting from this universally recognised fact, we shall try to explain the impulse to expression, as it appears in complex emotions, by the same laws which we deduced from an examination of simple hedonic states.

The legitimacy of such a course will scarcely be contested by any one who admits the vital and necessary connection between emotional states and movement-sensations. And in point of fact, this connection does not seem to be denied by many modern psychologists. There is indeed much controversy as to the best mode of formulating the well-known theory due to James and Lange, and there is also much to discuss in its general theoretic aspect. But the observation on which this theory was based by James, viz. that it is impossible for us to imagine any emotion which is not connected with feelings of bodily symptoms, seems nowadays to be pretty safe against attack. Before and after James, the fundamental importance of bodily changes has been acknowledged by almost all authors who have specially studied the emotional states. We need only refer to Bain, Ribot, Féré, Paulhan, and Godfernaux.[59] Even Professor Stout, who on general grounds takes exception to the views of James, leaves unassailed the thesis from which the latter starts in his chapter on the emotions.[60] And it is even somewhat superfluous to adduce all these authorities in support of a fact which must have been noted by every one who pays any attention to his own mental states. We never experience any intense emotion, such as fear, anger, or sorrow, without at the same time experiencing some distinct sensation of change in our functions of respiration and circulation, as well as in the activities of our voluntary muscles. In the case of emotions of slight intensity, where no changes of this character are perceptible, we are justified in assuming that they do nevertheless occur, only on a much smaller scale, and possibly in different organs. The clinical and experimental researches of medical science, as well as experiments undertaken in psychological laboratories, tend to prove that all ideas, even of the most abstract kind, are accompanied by modifications of organic activity, similar to, but weaker than, those which accompany the simple sensations. It is only natural, therefore, to conclude that the feeling-element in emotions and sentiments, as well as in simple pain and pleasure, is correlated with the quality—stimulating or inhibitive—and intensity of these modifications. All hedonic states, whether called forth directly by a simple physiological stimulus, or indirectly by the mediation of perceptions, memories, and ideas, can thus, in so far as they are feelings, be considered as essentially alike. The complete emotion, such as joy or anger, with all its elements of thought and conscious or unconscious volition, is of course something quite different from the simple feeling-tone of mere pleasure or pain. Physiological psychology does not, as its opponents maintain, assimilate gratifications of the sense of taste to æsthetic enjoyment or religious exaltation. We allow rank to a sentiment in virtue of the mental conceptions by which it is justified in the breast of the person who feels it. But the strength of such a sentiment, as feeling, we deem to be proportioned to the organic changes by which enthusiasm and devotion, just as much as sensual pleasure, are always accompanied. We do not assert that these organic changes are always identical in kind. In the simplest forms of hedonic sensation—sensation proper—they have their main equivalent in changes of the vegetative functions; in the emotions they are accompanied by movements of our voluntary muscles; and in the sentiments they may correspond to an activity which takes place chiefly in the organ of thought. And from these differences arise other important differences in duration as well as in intensity of the pleasure-pain. But all these various limitations cannot modify the essential fact, which is, that pleasure is always connected with an enhancement, and pain with a depression, of the vital functions.

For a satisfactory explanation of our emotions it would no doubt be desirable to have all the complicated physiological concomitants reduced to simple terms of functional enhancement and functional arrest. Such a reduction can, however, be undertaken only in a few favourable cases. We can easily see, for instance, that in pride and humiliation a series of perceptions and ideas have brought about conditions of facilitated and checked activity similar to those which, in sensational pleasure-pain, are created by simple physiological stimuli.[61] We may also agree with Lehmann when he endeavours to prove that the pain a child experiences when its mother leaves its bedside can be reduced to a sensation of arrested activity.[62] And we may in the same way explain our own feelings after losses which, from our point of view, are more serious, as largely due to the fact that an occasion of activity for our senses, thoughts, or bodily powers has been suddenly withdrawn. But it would be too laborious to enter upon such an analysis of all our compound emotions, and it is also superfluous. Even when the organic conditions of pleasure and pain cannot be detected among the intricate mass of intellectual and volitional elements which make up what we can observe of an emotion, we must still, from analogy, conclude that some kind of functional enhancement or arrest corresponds to the feeling-tone.

Seeing, then, that what we may call “pure feeling” remains the same in all possible combinations, we must expect to meet with the same phenomena in connection with the manifestations of the higher emotions and sentiments, as those already described in case of simple pain or pleasure. It is true that in fully formed anger, joy, contempt, and so on, the tendency to expression for expression’s sake—as when a child laughs or dances for mere joy—is seldom found pure and unmixed. But even in such complex states we may in the abstract distinguish the impulse directly and inherently connected with the physiological change—the impulse which tends automatically to bring out the tone of pleasure with more prominence or to relieve the tone of pain—from all the conscious and volitional activities by which the external cause of the feeling is either approached or avoided. We have only to remember that, as was the case with sensation-feelings, those intentional movements which are directly or by virtue of association connected with an emotion will always work in the same direction as the purely automatic expression.

With regard to anger, for instance, we can in theory, at all events, distinguish the activity which follows as a purely physiological reaction upon the initial inhibition, and which therefore is quite undirected by any idea of attacking an enemy, from the conscious reaction by which we strive with all our powers to overcome and annihilate a real or imaginary foe. But we know that both these kinds of expression produce similar mental effects. Whether we concentrate our attention on the element of pure feeling and its accompanying activities, or on the intermixture of intellectual and volitional elements by which the emotion is distinguished from simple pleasure-pain, we shall thus find that active manifestations always enhance the positive tone of feeling, which is in itself the counterpart of a functional enhancement, and relieve the negative tone, which is the counterpart of functional arrest.

To prove this assertion with regard to all the different emotions would mean an unnecessary repetition of the arguments adduced in the preceding chapter. We need therefore only dwell on a few individual cases in which the effects of expression, owing to the complex nature of all fully developed emotions, are subject to misinterpretation. It has, for instance, often been contended in psychological literature that pleasurable emotions lose in strength in the same degree as they are expressed. Mr. Spencer, who finds the physiological basis of all emotion in nervous tension, has tried to prove that joy is always strongest when most restrained. But the argument he adduces is by no means unimpeachable. He says that people who show the finest appreciation of humour are often capable of saying and doing the most laughable things with the utmost gravity.[63] In this instance joy has, however, been confounded with the sense of the comic, which is of course a purely intellectual gift, and which does not even presuppose a cheerful disposition. The less the expenditure of nervous force on outward activity, the greater is the efficiency with which the work of thought can be carried on.[64] There is thus a physiological reason why he who laughs least utters the best jokes. But all the fools whose mouths overflow with laughter (risus abundat in ore stultorum) may no doubt often be happier than the most talented humourist. No sane man would say that Swift was happy.

It is, however, undeniable that even joy gradually decreases if it is allowed an unimpeded outlet. But that is often a result of bodily fatigue, which makes thought as well as feeling impossible. Pleasure may also increase qua feeling, if its most outward manifestations are controlled. But hereby the activity has only, as Spencer himself remarks, been directed into new channels.[65] The motor impulses reflect themselves inwards and accumulate when their outlet is stopped. From bodily movements, which are its simplest and most natural expression, joy may thus be diverted into the region of thought. When a savage has attained so high a state of development as to be able to control the impulse to dance and yell for joy, the first dithyramb has been composed.

It is impossible for us to estimate the relative importance of internal and external activity. All we can say is that a joy, the outward expressions of which are controlled, probably gains in durability. But on the other hand it is possible that a joy which has been allowed a free discharge, in the very moment of expression is stronger qua feeling. If the motor impulses find no outlet in any direction, the emotional state will, as has already been pointed out, become more and more affected with elements of pain.

When the physiological counterpart of an emotion takes the form of an inhibition, the feeling-tone will of course gain in intensity in the same degree as wider and wider areas of activity come under the influence of the arrest. This law can also be observed in the course of development of all pain-emotions. Sorrow, despair, humiliation, and so on, are relatively mild as long as the inhibition is restricted to the voluntary muscles. They acquire their full and proper strength as feeling only when the involuntary activities take part in the functional disturbance. And we can often notice in ourselves how, in the same degree as a painful emotion increases, the inhibition cuts its way deeper and deeper into the organism.[66] Humiliation, which of all emotions is the most hopelessly and irredeemably painful, is in its higher degrees always accompanied by functional changes which make themselves felt even in our digestive organs. Literature, to which in questions of emotional psychology we must apply for the information which no experiment can supply, proves that it is hard to swallow. It has a bitter taste, and is sickening even in purely physical sense.[67] The greatest grief, on the other hand, that man has been able to imagine manifests itself physiologically as a complete internal as well as external paralysis, such as is suggested by the Greek myth of the sorrowing mother turned into stone.

The progress of functional inhibition from organ to organ and the accompanying increase of the pain-emotion does of course generally take place without the co-operation of volition. But the increase of an incipient pain-sentiment can also be facilitated by voluntary efforts. As Professor James remarks, we may effectively strengthen a mood of sadness if we only consistently arrest the activity of all the organs which are under the control of our will.[68] And it is well known that much is possible in the way of working up feelings of melancholy. It may seem somewhat strange that the cultivation of such painful states has attained so high a development in man. But the apparent paradox is solved if we direct our attention to the secondary tones of pleasure which can always be derived from artificial moods of suffering. Sentimental reflection is able to extract from them a peculiar satisfaction which is highly appreciated by certain temperaments. We need only refer to the literature of romanticism, which gives us most instructive instances of pride in sensibility. Another kind of enjoyment is attained when persons who consider themselves unfairly treated by cruel fortune deliberately feed upon their own sufferings. As Spencer has shrewdly pointed out, they will infallibly derive a pleasurable sensation of their own value when contrasting their fate with the happiness which they consider their due.[69] Melancholy people, on the other hand, may perhaps be inclined to make themselves as helpless and unfortunate as possible for the sake of experiencing both sides of that “love of the helpless”[70] which, according to Spencer, is the most primordial form of altruistic feeling. The expressions and pantomimes of sadness often strike us as a kind of self-caressing in which the sufferer, by division of his own personality, enjoys the double pleasure of giving and receiving.

According to the most consistent terminology, this tendency to enhance feeling by voluntary co-operation with functional inhibition ought perhaps to be considered as the characteristic expression of painful emotion. It is, however, as has already been pointed out in our treatment of sensation-feeling, more in conformity with ordinary usage—and also with etymology—to apply the word expression to those active, outward manifestations by which the inhibition is relieved. There can be no inconvenience in doing so if we only keep constantly in mind the distinction between the expression which enhances and the expression which relieves. As long as these two notions are confounded, a consistent explanation of emotional states is quite impossible. The contradictions in Professor James’ brilliant chapter on the emotions furnish us with a ready proof of this impossibility. If he had based his theory upon a close discrimination of either class of expression, as they can be distinguished in simple sensational feeling, he would probably not have contended that sorrow is increased by sobbing,[71] while admitting in another passage that “dry and shrunken sorrow” is more painful than any “crying fit.”[72]

It is, however, impossible to deny that sighing, sobbing, twisting the hands, and other active manifestations are often effectively used, by actors, for example, as means for working up despair or sorrows.[73] But it seems to us indubitable that these movements when they succeed in creating the real feeling do so by help of association. A pain-emotion which has been called into existence by such dramatic mechanism is therefore seldom quite genuine. Real sorrow, hate, or anger, as pain-feelings, are on their physiological side much more deeply seated than these surface expressions, which, properly speaking, are merely a reproduction of the usual reactions upon the primary feeling. They are therefore not to be easily stirred up by aid of mimetic action.

It may perhaps be contended that these remarks apply only to the artificial creation of pain-emotion. When under the sway of veritable sorrow we undoubtedly feel as if the mental state were really intensified during its expression by the direct influence of the muscular activities, which constitute the sighing, sobbing, or crying. As far as the compound emotion is concerned, this observation is unquestionably correct. Sorrow, with all its intellectual and volitional elements, may become more distinct for consciousness the more it is actively expressed. But the pain itself, which constitutes the primary and initial state of this emotion, has by no means been increased. On the contrary, a crying fit, for instance, as even Professor James admits, may be accompanied by a kind of excitement which has a peculiar tone of pungent pleasure.[74]

The same process can be observed in the course of all the so-called pain-emotions. During active expression, while the general mental state increases in definiteness, the purely “algedonic” element of pain is gradually weakened or changed. Anger, which begins with an inhibition and a vascular contraction, to which,[75] on the mental side, corresponds a feeling of intense pain, is thus in its active stage a decidedly pleasurable emotion.[76] Fear, which in its initial stage is paralysing and depressing, often changes in tone when the first shock has been relieved by motor reaction.[77] And to some extent the same may be said even of despair. In every pain-emotion where there is a development of active energy involved in the reaction upon the initial feeling, the tone of this feeling is apt to undergo some change owing to the influence of this activity.

This circumstance explains why expression for expression’s sake as a life-preserving principle occupies so important a place in the life of man. But it also accounts for another phenomenon which, although not directly connected with the expressional impulse, is æsthetically so important that it cannot properly be passed over in this work. We refer to the apparent paradox that anger, fear, sorrow, notwithstanding their distinctly painful initial stage, are often not only not avoided, but even deliberately sought. Taken in connection with those perhaps even more curious cases, in which sensation-feelings of pain are intentionally provoked, this apparent inversion of the normal course constitutes one of the most important problems in emotional psychology. The question of such “luxuries of grief,” or, to use a more appropriate German phrase, “Die Wonne des Leids,” is, however, so complicated that its treatment will require a chapter to itself.