huntresses or the Norns than the Parcae? And are not the latter infinitely nearer to us than the former, and far richer in meaning?
But what want bringing out are the analogies of musical feeling that correspond to the analogies between musical subjects. Rameau and Wagner have given to their symphonic music the character of real plastic creations. I am not saying that they are descriptive writers; that term would be weak, or rather the idea would be inaccurate. An act of the imagination is involved that is far deeper and stronger than description. In these masters the poetic impressions of spectacles of nature and fancy inspire musical forms that have as much boldness in rhythm as simplicity in melody, and shew a wonderful relief. They might well be called syntheses by music. "Rameau's music" as M. Lionel de la Laurencie so well says "seeks its end outside itself. It strives to paint, to express. It has an extra-musical function; it aims no doubt at translating human sentiments, but it aims also and especially at transposing spectacles and visions, at characterising their appearance and profound signification. That is where Rameau is a great, a magnificent musician. His themes present themselves to us with an astonishing clearness and firmness of outline. They have a marvellous precision, a definitive quality. Their tonal clarity is perfect and their character clearly shewn." These features would apply, with a shade (but an important shade) of difference to the more famous symphonic themes of the Tetralogy. The difference is that the latter have in their splendour a certain heaviness, though a heaviness that suits them. We prefer Rameau's light material. It is of no less good quality.
