Part 5
"You may open the abdomens of living cats, guinea-pigs, and rabbits, and apply irritating chemicals to their exposed intestines, causing what you are pleased to term 'peculiar rhythmic movements' and 'circus movements,' but what the unlearned would call violent spasms and convulsions, as was done by Dr. Batten and Mr. Bokenham, at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, last year. You may dissect out the kidneys of living dogs and cats which you have first paralyzed by curare--the 'hellish oorali' of Lord Tennyson's poem, so called because the animal's sufferings are intensified by its use, and it is unable to move a limb, or to bite, scratch, howl, or otherwise interfere with the operator's comfort. You may do this, as was done by Dr. John Rose Bradford, at University College, London. You may infect ninety cats with cholera poison, and bake numbers of them alive, as did Dr. Lander Brunton. You may inoculate the eyes of rabbits and guinea-pigs with the material of tubercle, fix glass balls filled with croton oil--a horribly irritating drug--and stitch them into the muscles of the backs of rabbits, then crush them amongst their tissues, as did Dr. Watson Cheyne, at King's College, London. You may slice, plough, burn, and pick away the brains of monkeys and dogs, as did Dr. Ferrier. You may slowly starve to death animals whose vagi nerves have been cut and stimulated by electricity, as was done by Dr. Gaskell, of this University, in 1878. You may cut out the spleens and livers from living rabbits, pigeons, and ducks, as was done by Dr. William Hunter, of St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1888, or do a thousand other acts which in a coster-monger or a farm laborer would be termed and dealt with as acts of atrocious cruelty, punishable by imprisonment. But you have not learned the cure for a single malady which afflicts the human body."
THE MOVEMENTS OF THE TONGUE
There is another mode of proceeding by which satisfactory results can be obtained, and which was the only one I resorted to in the beginning and for many years afterwards; namely, the watching of the movements of the tongue.
The muscle of the tongue, for vocal utterance, is the most important in our organization. It appears to me, in fact, as if in its tip there were a concentration of all the threads which control our existence; and that it is, therefore, representative of an epitome of our entire being. As all sciences, in a general, though in some instances perhaps somewhat remote, sense, centre in the science of life, so do the controlling elements in our composition centre in the tip of the tongue. If it were possible to analyze it spiritually as well as physically, we would obtain a compendium of knowledge far in advance of any there is in existence in the world at the present time. Still, it must be admitted that this would, to some extent, depend upon _whose_ tongue's tip was submitted to such analyzation. The fact of the tip of the tongue being removed by surgical operation without serious effect upon the mental condition of the individual does not greatly affect my assertion. In that case the concentration must have taken place at the tongue's new tip or end.
The tongue's tip, with as infallible correctness as the magnetic needle points towards the north pole, indicates the exact spot whence sounds come, or should come, to appear on the surface in a clear and undefiled manner. The tongue's tip, for English vowel sounds, does not touch any part of the oral cavity. It is constantly changing its position, however, and for every vowel sound, or shade of a vowel sound, points in the direction of or _approaches_ the spot whence a sound comes, or should come. To ascertain such spot with exactitude, it is but necessary to _extend_ the tongue's tip until it reaches the wall of the oral cavity during or, still better, immediately after the utterance of a vocal sound. Upon reaching that spot the tongue may continue in the same position of contact and the sound can still be uttered with entire purity. Change this point of contact, however, but in the least, and such sound will at once cease to come to the surface. Yet, while _apparently_ a sound comes from the direction in which the tip of the tongue points, this is not really the case. In pointing in a given direction, the tongue opens up the channels of the œsophagus and the trachea in a special manner for the proper emission of a given sound, beneath as well as above, and to the left as well as to the right of its radix. In changing the tongue's position but in the least, these channels will open in a different direction, which may then be the proper medium for the emission of another sound, but not for the one under consideration.
The general mode in which the radix of the tongue turns upon its axis is the direct and fundamental cause productive of the various languages of the world; such general mode necessitating special movements of the tongue for the production of the sounds of any special language. Regarding the proper emission of consonant sounds every one knows that the same depends upon the particular spot of contact of the tongue's tip with parts of the oral cavity. As a matter of fact, such point of contact also opens, the same as with vowel sounds, the tubes of the trachea and œsophagus at the tongue's radix in the proper manner for the emission of a given stream of air for the production of such consonant sounds.
Every imaginable opprobrious epithet has been by singers bestowed upon the tongue. "This obstreperous muscle which is always in the way," says one. "This troublesome member will persist in going up when you want it to remain down"; "intractable," "contrary," "obstinate," "wilful," "ungovernable," "stubborn." All these expressions have been used by writers on the voice in connection with the tongue, simply because it would not yield to unreasonable and unnatural demands made upon it; the tongue, being a free agent, persisting in its natural rights--as much so as any independent democratic citizen persists in his.
My observations having been made in connection with a foreign language, I had a better opportunity for watching my tongue's movements than I would have had had I attempted to watch them in connection with my native tongue; the movements of the tongue in connection with the latter being so rapid and involuntary that it becomes exceedingly difficult to make any observations at all. It was like having this foreign (English) tongue exist independently alongside of my own, my intelligence watching it, and guiding it, now here, now there, until it would touch the right spot for the right English sound. Knowing what the right sound was and should be, I never stopped until the same came to the surface.
In trying to find my way in this foreign (English) territory of the oral cavity, I might compare my English tongue to the stick in the hands of a blind man, who uses it in place of his eyes to ascertain his whereabouts, so as to enable him to proceed on his way in the right direction. With my "stick" I felt in every direction, till I found I could steer clear of obstacles straight into the channel of the sound I had been seeking. From my German post of observation I was thus enabled to watch the movements of my English tongue in its efforts to find itself "at home" in this foreign territory, while I was at the same time guiding it from one point therein to another.
I want to call especial attention to and reiterate the fact that the exact point whence a sound proceeds, or seems to proceed, can, by extending the tongue's tip, be quite as well (if not better) ascertained, _after_ the utterance of a sound, as _during_ such utterance; that is _immediately_ after the tongue has ceased to vibrate for such sound.
The difference in the movements of the tongue for various languages is one of the most interesting observations to be made in connection with these studies. The German language being the exact opposite, the antipode, to the English, after comprehending the movements of the tongue for the latter, its own movements, that is, the movements of the tongue for German sounds, were not difficult for me to ascertain.
It is an anomaly to apply the works of German writers on the voice to the study of the English language, or to that of any other than the German language; or to apply books written from an English standpoint to the study of any language except the English--the movements of the tongue, and, in sympathy therewith, of countless other muscles, being different for every language.
Whatever the movements of the tongue are for the _spoken_ language, they are of an inverse order for _song_. I anticipate in making the following statement, namely, that while speech is of an order which is rapid, direct, anterior, exterior, spontaneous, impulsive, and material, song is of an order which is slow, indirect, posterior, interior, premeditated, contemplative, and spiritual. I will also add this: that, _while speech is of the oral cavity, song is of the pharynx_. In making these remarks and others _in anticipation_, I do so intentionally and for a purpose; not so much in expectation that they will be at once and fully understood, as with a view of setting others thinking on these subjects until I can reach them in due course of time; or, if I should _never_ be able to reach them, that the principle, at least, underlying the same, which if the opportunity had been granted me would have been fully sustained, shall not be lost. The reader will notice that I am hurrying over the ground as rapidly as I consistently can, even from my--under the best of circumstances--superficial standpoint, leaving wide gaps to be filled in by others in the course of time.
SIMPLE SOUNDS
Speaking of sounds in making experiments in connection with the movements of the tongue, it is of the first importance that these sounds should be _simple_ and not _vocal_ or compound. They must be sounds of the same order as we utter in whispering, or such sounds as we are apt to use when learning to speak a foreign tongue. They are the inharmonious sounds of the deaf, and those which distinguish the speech of a foreigner from that of the native-born.
The recognition of these sounds as the _negative parts of speech_ has been one of my main accomplishments, and has been of the greatest assistance to me in my investigations.
Things _complete_ tell no tales. We must decompose them, reduce them to their elements, if we want to arrive at the truth in matters of science. I have succeeded in doing with things spiritual--vocal sounds--what the chemist is doing with things material. In things complete, as they are shaped by the hand of nature, the elements of which they are composed are mingled in such a dexterous manner, are so happily blended, that they adjust, counterpoise, and complement one another, and thus live with and in one another.
These new forms have been created by the elements of which they are composed, abandoning their separate original forms and now appearing in a new form, as integral parts of an _harmonious_ entity. These elements have not only abandoned their form, however, but in most instances have also changed their character; which in their original composition may have been of a _discordant_, violent, and even dangerous nature. Take but the atmospheric air and its elements for an example.
A similar state of affairs exists in connection with the phenomena of the material-spiritual world. While vocal sounds, when properly produced, stand for all that is harmonious and pleasing, their component parts, their positive and negative elements, by themselves, offer features of a contrary nature. They also offer us, the same as elements do to the chemist while making experiments, the opportunity for making an endless number of combinations. Unless you know what _simple_ sounds--_i. e._, negative parts of vocal sounds--are, and know how to produce them, you will scarcely be able to make one class of experiments which I shall offer in great abundance to sustain my arguments.
When I shall reach the subject of vocal sounds proper, I shall more fully explain their exact nature. I will simply say this at present: A simple sound is the product of that hemisphere only to which it properly belongs. A vocal sound is aided and assisted by a complementary sound from the other hemisphere. The more perfect such aid, the more perfect will be its tone. Simple vowel sounds are short, abrupt, the same as consonant sounds when produced all by themselves and without the aid of a vowel sound uttered in conjunction with them.
POSTERIOR SURFACES
In saying, as I have, that introspection is carried on by looking into ourselves with the _inner surface of our eyes_, I meant to say, in the first instance, that we must exclude all exterior vision, and then attempt to locate and follow up the course of events going on within us. While in this state we are strictly reduced to our personal and individual existence. In thus "watching," the function of our eyes, instead of being used for external material observation, is reversed; their function now being to observe internally and spiritually.
In connection with sounds, you will not only "in your mind's eye" _see_ the places where they originate, and _feel_ the course they are taking, but you will actually, functionally (in the mode of spiritually seeing and feeling), "see" and "feel" them. This vision and this feeling is far from being perfect, however,--not being accustomed to thus seeing and feeling,--but it may, when continuously exercised, become so in the course of time. While in this state, besides seeing the places interiorly, you may also see them exteriorly, by reflection as it were, and in a reverse order, "as in a looking-glass," in which case it is still an interior vision reflected exteriorly. As a matter of fact, I not only believe, but positively _know_, that _every exterior functional surface has a corresponding posterior one_.
Whenever a thing is brought _home_ to us, either through our organs of seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, or tasting, the outer surface of such respective organ constitutes the positive factor for such action, while its inner surface constitutes the negative factor thereof. Whenever the outer world is excluded, however, as during thought, introspection, and in our sleep, the inner surface of any of these organs becomes the positive, and the outer surface the negative, factor. In thus saying, "I see with the inner surface of my eyes," I do not mean this figuratively only, but literally, functionally, as well; as I could not see these places and locate them internally nor could I see any subject or object with "my mind's eye," if the faculty of seeing were not actually given to the posterior surface of the eye.
This will become clear when you consider that you will altogether fail to see internally when you attempt to use the _anterior_ surface of your eye for the purpose of _internal_ vision. Thus, the phenomena of vision which accompany thought or dreams, during sleep as well as in our waking moments, are not merely spiritual, but, in the sense of internal functional vision, are also material, so to say. _All_ thought, in fact, is more or less of this same nature. We use the posterior surfaces of our organs of sense more frequently, in consequence, than we do their corresponding anterior surfaces. Physiologists will say there is no such a thing as an inner surface of the eye capable of seeing. This does not alter the fact that I actually, functionally, see with the posterior surface of my eyes, and that everybody else does the same thing.
I shall, in connection with vocal utterance, have occasion to call attention to numerous divisions of as positive a character as a wall of living tissue, of which there is not a trace to be seen by external vision; these divisions being channels, constantly used in one and the same direction, some for ingoing, others for outgoing streams of air and sounds. Of these channels, also, being invisible to the outer surface of the eye, science has never taken any notice. These invisible agencies are connecting links, mediating between cause and result, in connection with material-spiritual or spiritual-material phenomena of whatsoever nature brought to our consciousness. Hence the inability of science, in its ignorance of these agencies, to reconcile the one with the other by the aid of such material only as has been heretofore at its disposal. We may _see_ proceedings going on which are mediating between cause and effect, by the assistance of the inner surface of our eyes. They disappear altogether, as well as any other "vision," upon an attempt being made at seeing them with the external surface of our eyes. Yet we may see inwardly with our eyes open, as we do when absent-minded, etc.
If we could invent a microscope by the aid of which we could look into ourselves in a _spiritual_ sense, that is, through posterior surfaces, _all_ the secret springs of our nature might be revealed to us. This ability to become cognizant of physiologico-psychological processes by the aid of the inner surfaces of our organs of sense, reveals a peculiar functional exercise of their faculties. In matters of memory they are not intended to aid in conveying to our consciousness impressions made at the _present_, but those made at a previous time. These impressions having been made on the soft tablets of our brain, either during our individual existence or that of our progenitors, and transmitted to us by dint of heredity, are brought to our consciousness by the aid of these inner surfaces, _phonographically_. They are awakened by association; and that organ of sense by the aid of whose anterior surface they were first received and _recorded_, now reawakens them by the aid of its posterior surface. Visions, consequently, are reflections made on the inner surface of the eyes, from impressions previously made upon the brain, in a similar manner to that by which sounds come forth from a phonograph. They could not assume shape if they were not thus reflected. It is owing to the nature of these reflections that they are more fleeting and evanescent than those made by the objects themselves upon the external surface of the eyes.
The anterior and posterior surfaces of all organs, by whose aid we exercise our faculties, which surfaces represent their poles and dual factors, the positive and the negative, the material and the spiritual, change places in conformity with whether an object is impressed upon them exteriorly or interiorly, in the present or the past, directly or indirectly, physically or spiritually. Things which are brought to our consciousness from the exterior world and in a direct manner--through our senses--may be said to be of a _material_ nature; while those which come to us indirectly--through our inner consciousness--may be said to be of _spiritual_ origin. The clearness of our visions naturally depends upon the clearness of the impression still remaining upon the tablets of the brain. The more stirring the event in the first instance, the deeper and more lasting, of course, the impression. All this, however, does not throw any light upon the process of abstract thought; nor am I in a position to aid in so doing. Yet it appears to me to be a sister proceeding; and that a nearer approach to an explanation of those more material phenomena may finally assist in arriving at an explanation of the causes of these more recondite and apparently purely spiritual phenomena.
The correctness of the preceding remarks will become more apparent when we substitute for the faculty of seeing, that of hearing. We hear the voice of another person through the _anterior_ part of our ear, _entering_, as it does, from _without_. We hear our own voice through the _posterior_ part of our ear, _going out_, as it does, from _within_. No matter how low we may speak, we can always hear our own voice, though inaudible to others; and we can still distinctly hear it at such time, even when we fail to hear a low, though in fact relatively much louder, tone proceeding from the voice of another person. A ventriloquist, on the other hand, with whom these relations are reversed, hears his own voice reflected from without, inwardly, while, if he continues in the same condition while listening to another person's voice, he will hear the latter from within, outwardly.
For the purpose of testing the correctness of these observations, please pay attention to the following: In listening to the sounds of another person's speech, you will have no difficulty in noticing that they stream into your ear from without, inwardly. Now, substitute for this other person's voice the sounds of your own voice, _and continue to listen to the same in precisely the same manner in which you did to those of this other person_; that is, let them flow into your ear from without, inwardly. The result will be _that you will not only not hear the sounds of your own voice, but that these sounds themselves will become paralyzed, that you will not be able to produce any sound whatever_.
The cause is obvious. You attempt to listen to negative sounds with the side of your ear still tuned negatively; while, ordinarily, when we cease to listen and commence to speak, _all_ poles are reversed. Spoken sounds are positive in relation to the speaker, but negative in relation to the person listening to the same. In consequence, the producer hears them with the negative (inner) part of his ear, the receiver, or listener, hears them with the positive (exterior) part of his ear.
I copy the following from an article in the _Philadelphia Sunday Press_:
"A curious fact in regard to the effect of explosions upon the drumhead, is that this tissue, though generally blown in, is sometimes blown out. Just what causes the latter result has not yet been fully explained."
In this instance, I presume, the person's ear was tuned to listen interiorly, and the effect of the explosion, which, in relation to him, was of a negative nature, took effect on the positive, the posterior, side of his ear. This person was not in expectancy of the explosion, but it came on unawares, of a sudden, while he was in a state of contemplation.
In connection with the eye, our inner consciousness acts as a "rein" upon the outer, drawing back in case of danger, checking our progress when suddenly coming upon a precipice, and _regulating our steps_ to circumvent it, but without coming to a stop, when seeing an obstacle in our way from a distance. The "rein" in such an instance reverses the poles of the eyes--the positive becomes negative and the negative positive; that is to say, in our usual mode of seeing, while walking, the exterior surface of the eye is positive, the interior negative; but when there is danger ahead and we are warned to be cautious, the exterior becomes negative and the interior positive; the activity now being exercised by the latter, the passivity by the former. The action of the "rein," however, is not direct, but crosswise; that is to say, the posterior surface of the left eye is in correspondence with the anterior of the right, and vice versa, in conformity with the "impulse" emanating from either the one or the other, while the anterior surface of the left eye is in correspondence with the posterior of the right, and vice versa.