June 7, 1877] 



NA TURE 



99 



of xsthetics. For although the two classes are intimately 

 blended in reality, this only makes it the more desirable 

 to eliminate the one from the other in our analysis ; so 

 that we may perceive, as clearly as we can, how much of 

 the total effect which our resthetic consciousness supplies 

 admits of being resolved into simple constituents, and 

 how much remains over as complex constituents. Now 

 in this respect Mr. Allan has profited well by the expe- 

 rience of previous writers ; for while he treats his subject 

 very thoroughly so far as it can be treated on the lower 

 basis of physiology, he never permits himself to be 

 tempted into the alluring superstructure of pure psycho- 

 logy. So rigidly, indeed, docs he " stick to his text," that 

 an uninformed reader might peruse the whole essay, and 

 scarcely receive a hint that there is such a thing as "the 

 association theory" in existence; while the names of 

 Burke, Reynolds, Alison, Knight, Stewait, and Jeffrey 

 are not even once mentioned. 



The scope of the treatise being thus carefully confined 

 to the more simple factors of our esthetic emotions, space 

 is afforded for a full exposition of numerous facts and 

 theories relating to this important sub-division of psycho- 

 logical science. And, on the whole, the work has been 

 well done. The arrangement is good, the style admirably 

 lucid, and the spirit throughout scientific. True, there 

 are no ideas of a strikingly original character ; but a 

 judicious compilation of facts already known, and a philo- 

 sophical discussion of the more important theories which 

 have been raised upon them, would be features in a work 

 sufficient of themselves to make the latter a valuable 

 addition to the literature of aesthetics. Mr. Allan, how- 

 ever, has done more than this. In his dedication he 

 characterises his work as a " slight attempt to extend in 

 a tingle direction the general principles which he (Mr. 

 Herbert Spencer) has laid down ; " and in this attempt 

 we must allow that our author has been successful. 



Setting out with the object of " exhibiting the purely 

 physical origin of the sense of beauty, and its relativity to 

 our nervous organisation, Mr. Allan begins by " investi- 

 gating the nature of Pleasures and Pains generally." The 

 most important part of this discussion is that in which he 

 criticises the law thus enunciated by Prof. Bain : " States 

 of pleasure are concomitant with an increase, and states of 

 prin with an abatement, of some, or all, of the vital func- 

 tions." On this law it is remarked, with justice, " in its 

 endeavour to be antithetical, it misses the real relationship 

 between the two states. If pleasures were the psychical 

 concomitants of an increase of the vital functions, then 

 our two greatest, if not our only pleasures ought to be 

 digestion, and repose after exertion. . . . Mr. Bain has 

 sighted this difficulty, but, not perceiving its full force, 

 has endeavoured to avoid it by a supplementary theory of 

 stimulation, which appears to me far more important than 

 his main law. 1 believe the true principle of connection 

 to be this: Pleasure is theconcomitant of the healthy action 

 of any or all of the organs or members supplied with 

 afferent cerebro-spinal nerves, to an extent not exceeding 

 the ordinary powers of reparation possessed by the 

 system. And just as the two laws are not exactly anti- 

 thetical, so too the feelings themselves are not directly 

 and absolutely opposed to one another as will be seen 

 in the sequel ... In short, it wi be seen that while 

 Prof. Bain refers pleasure to an increase in the efficiency 



of the organism, it may better be regarded as the concomi- 

 tant of a normal amount of activity in any portion or the 

 whole of the organism." Thus " every activity when not 

 excessive nor of a sort to prove destructive of the tissues, 

 is doubtless in itself faintly pleasurable . . . but owing to 

 the commonness and faintness of the feeling, we habit- 

 ually disregard it." Nevertheless, when the whole 

 organism is " under the influence of abundant food and 

 good rest, the general stimulation of the nerves produces 

 a consciousness of massive pleasure." Moreover, "the 

 special stimulation of a single organ whose periods of 

 activity are long intermittent, and which is at the culmi- 

 nating point of its nutrition, produces consciousness of 

 acute pleasure." From considerations such as these, 

 illustrated by a large number of subsequent examples, 

 there is deduced the general formula, that " the amount 

 of pleasure is probably in the direct ratio of the number 

 of nerve fibres involved, and in the invei'se ratio of the 

 natural frequency of stimulation." Hence it is that the 

 possible intensity of pleasures can never approach the 

 possible intensity of pains ; for while the organism, or 

 parts of it ; may be reduced or injured to a large extent 

 before loss of sensibility supervenes, " efficient working 

 cannot be raised very high above the average." Hence, 

 too, " the aesthetically beautiful is that which affords the 

 maximum of stimulation with the minimum of fatigue or 

 waste, in processes not directly concerned with vital 

 functions." ' 



Such may be said to be the foundation on which the 

 present system of " Physiological /Esthetics" is raised. 

 Thus, to select a few among the copious illustrations which 

 are offered :-- "The vulgar are pleased by great masses 

 of colour, especially red, orange, and purple, which give 

 their coarse nervous organisation the requisite stimulus ; 

 the refined, with nerves of less calibre but greater dis- 

 criminativeness," require delicate combinations o{ comple- 

 mcntarics. Similarly in music, the complex liarmony of a 

 Bach's fugue pleases the cultured ear, while a chorus of 

 Offenbach, or the boisterous melody of a comic song, is 

 more gratifying to the common people. Again, the 

 aesthetic superiority of musical tones over mere noises is 

 naturally explained by the fact, that " while the nervous 

 apparatus for the perception of the latter receives frequent 

 stimulation, each portion of the nervous apparatus for the 

 perception of the former is comparatively seldom stimu- 

 lated." Similarly, of course, simple tones are musically 

 " poor," because they " can only arouse a sympathetic vi- 

 bration in a single one of Cortis's organs;" while tones 

 rich in harmonics are musically "full," because they 

 stimulate a correspondingly greater number of Cortis's 

 organs. Beats, again, are disagreeable, because " the ear is 

 conscious of each separate interruption of the tone, and 

 each subsequent reinforcement," thus receiving a des/ruc- 

 tiTc amount of intermittent stimulation. Similarly, though 

 in a lesser degree, with dissonance ; and similarly, too, 

 with the optic nerve, when flashes of intermittent light 

 follow one another too rapidly for the receptive material 



' The Litter qualification arises from a lengthy discussion in which Mr 

 Sperctr's view as to the origin of liie Play-instirct from a superfluity of 

 ner\ous energy is explained. This is explained in order that the aesthetic 

 feelings, which by the theory are supposed to have a similar origin, may be 

 analytically differentiated from the playful feelings — the distil 

 Art and Hay being supposed to consist largely! 



■.f.d 



the over-fed sensory fibres, " the orga 

 passive side of our nature " 



the fact that while the 

 fibres.' the former has reference to 

 I of sight, hearing, &c.," or " the 



