Hegel, consists of the inferiority in grade of art in comparison with pure thought. "Art in its highest form is and for us must remain a thing of the past"; and just because the thing has vanished, one can reason about it philosophically.[50] The Æsthetic of Hegel is thus a funeral oration: he passes in review the successive forms of art, shows the progressive steps of internal consumption and lays the whole in its grave, leaving Philosophy to write its epitaph. Romanticism and metaphysical idealism had elevated art to such a fantastic height among the clouds that at last they were obliged to admit that it was so far away as to be absolutely useless. [1] _Vorles. über die Ästhetik_ (2nd ed., Berlin, 1842), vol. i. p. 78. [2] Sommer, _Gesch. d. Psych. u. Ästh._ pp. 365-432. [3] Danzel, _Ges. Aufs._ p. 242. [4] _Briefe ü. d. Ästh. Erzieh._ (in Werke, ed. Goedecke), Letters 15, 27. [5] _Op. cit._ Letter 15. [6] _Briefe_, Letter 22. [7] _Op. cit._ Letter 25. [8] _Briefe_, Letter 20. [9] _Briefe,_ Letter 15. [10] Danzel, _Ges. Aufs._ p. 241. [11] _Vorschule der Ästh.,_ 1804 (French trans., _Poétique ou introduction à l'Esth.,_ Paris, 1862), preface. [12] _Vorschule d. Ästh._ chs. 2, 3. [13] _Grundl. der Wissenschaftslehre,_ in _Werke_ (Berlin, 1845), vol. i. pp. 214-217. [14] Danzel, _Ges. Aufs._ pp. 25-30; Zimmermann, _G. d. A._ pp. 522-572. [15] Hegel, _Vorles. üb. d. Ästh._ introd. vol. i. pp. 82-88. [16] _Vorles. üb. d. Methode d. akadem. Stud._ (1803), lecture 14; in _Werke_ (Stuttgart, 1856-1861), vol. v, pp. 346-347. [17] _Üb. d. Verhältniss d. bild. Künste, z. d. Natur_ in _Werke,_ vol. vii. pp. 299-310. [18] _Philos, d. Kunst,_ posthumous, introd. in _Werke,_ v. p. 362. [19] _System d. transcend. Idealismus,_ in _Werke,_ § i. vol. iii. introd. § 3, p. 349. [20] _Op. cit._ § 4, p. 351. [21] _System d. transcend. Idealismus,_ in _Werke,_ part vi. § 3, p. 627. [22] _Op. cit._ § 3, pp. 627-629. [23] _Phil. d. Kunst,_ pp. 368-369. [24] _Op. cit._ p. 369. [25] _Op. cit._ General Part, p. 381. [26] _Phil. d. Kunst,_ p. 382. [27] _Op. cit._ p. 383. [28] _Op. cit._ p. 385. [29] _Op. cit._ pp. 389-390. [30] _Phil. d. Kunst,_ pp. 390-393. [31] _Op. cit._ p. 395. [32] _Op. cit._ pp. 405-451. [33] _Vorles. üb. Ästhetik_, Heyse, Leipzig, 1829, pp. 35-43. [34] Vorles. üb. Ästh. pp. 186-200. [35] Op. cit. pp. 48-85. [36] _Encykl. d. phil. Wiss._ §§ 557-563. [37] _Vorles. üb. Ästh._ (_ed. cit._) i. p. 118. [38] _Op. cit._ i. pp. 129-133. [39] _Vorles. üb. Ästh._ i. p. 141. [40] _Op. cit._ i. p. 89. [41] _Op. cit._ i. pp. 50-51. [42] _Op. cit._ i. pp. 354-355. [43] _Encykl._ § 450. [44] Danzel, _Ästh. d. hegel. Sch._ p. 62; Zimmermann, _G. d. A._ pp. 693-697; J. Schmidt, _L. u. B._ pp. 103-105; Spitzer, _Krit. St._ p. 48. [45] Fr. Ast, _System der Kunstlehre,_ Leipzig, 1805; cf. Spitzer, _op. cit._ p. 48. [46] _System d. transcend. Idealismus_ (1800), part vi. § 2; in _Werke,_ § I, vol. iii. pp. 622-623.