Conclusions: Three statements, three questions
In Chapter 1, I noted the importance of creative metaphors to my analytical approach, and pointed briefly to Laurence Zbikowski’s (2009) account of ‘multimodal metaphors’ as illustrative of the active role these concepts can play in
our experience of this music. By now, it should be clear just how important these metaphorical connections are to the analyses presented here, and how deeply they are embedded in the notion of coherence I outline. The crucial thing about a multimodal metaphor is that it cuts both ways; Zbikowski provides examples of musical text-setting that illustrate this, with the music shaping our reading of a text just as much as the text shapes our hearing of the music (2009: 360-2). Although none of the works discussed here have a vocal text, each of them affords rich possibilities for multimodal metaphors through paratextual elements such as titles or programme notes, through musical quotations that open up other associations, and sometimes through more personal or intuitive connections (e.g., the discussion of mosaic in relation to Arcadiana or of Hölderlin with ΣΤΗΛΗ). These metaphors are truly ‘multimodal’, encompassing not only music and text but also other art forms such as painting and photography, as well as natural phenomena and mythical archetypes. The enriched concept of aesthetic experience developed in Chapter 1 (with reference to similar developments elsewhere in recent musicology) provides further conceptual justification for these kinds of multi-directional analytical metaphors.