Laocoon : $b An essay upon the limits of painting and poetry. With remarks illustrative of various points in the history of ancient art.Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim
Philosophy
Laocoon : $b An essay upon the limits of painting and poetry. With remarks illustrative of various points in the history of ancient art.
Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim
Aesthetics -- Early works to 1800; Agesander. Laocoön group
Protogenes had painted the mother of Aristotle. I know not how much the
philosopher paid for the picture, but instead of the full payment, or
perhaps over and above it, he gave the painter a piece of advice which
was of more value than the money. Not, as I believe, in the way of
flattery, but because he knew that art needed to make itself universally
intelligible, he advised him to paint the exploits of Alexander. The
whole world was ringing with the fame of them, and he could foresee that
their memory would remain to all posterity. But Protogenes was not wise
enough to follow this counsel. “Impetus animi,” says Pliny, “et quædam
artis libido,”[84] a certain presumption in art, and a craving after
something new and strange, led him to the choice of other subjects. He
preferred the story of Ialysus,[85] of Cydippe, and others of like kind,
whose meaning we can now scarce even conjecture.
XII.
Homer treats of two different classes of beings and actions,—the visible
and the invisible. This distinction cannot be made on canvas, where
every thing is visible, and visible in precisely the same way.
When Count Caylus, therefore, makes pictures of invisible actions follow
immediately upon pictures of visible ones; and in scenes of mixed
actions, participated in by beings of both kinds, does not, and perhaps
cannot, indicate how those figures which only we who look at the picture
are supposed to see, shall be so represented that the characters in the
picture shall not see them, or at least shall not look as if they could
not help seeing them, he makes the whole series, as well as many
separate pictures, in the highest degree confused, unintelligible, and
self-contradictory.
With the book before us this difficulty might finally be overcome. The
great objection would be that, with the loss of all distinction to the
eye between the visible and the invisible beings, all the characteristic
traits must likewise disappear, which serve to elevate the higher order
of beings above the lower.
When, for instance, the gods who take different sides in the Trojan war
come at last to actual blows, the contest goes on in the poem
unseen.[86] This invisibility leaves the imagination free play to
enlarge the scene at will, and picture the gods and their movements on a
scale far grander than the measure of common humanity. But painting must
accept a visible theatre, whose various fixed parts become a scale of
measurement for the persons acting upon it. This scale is always before
the eye, and the disproportionate size of any superhuman figures makes
beings that were grand in the poem monstrous on canvas.
Minerva, on whom Mars had made the first attack, steps backward and with
mighty hand lifts from the ground an enormous stone, black and rough,
which, in old times, had required the strength of many men to be rolled
into its place and set up as a landmark.[87]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account