The Eagle's Nest: Ten Lectures on the Relation of Natural Science to Art, Given Before the University of Oxford, in Lent Term, 1872Ruskin, John
Philosophy
The Eagle's Nest: Ten Lectures on the Relation of Natural Science to Art, Given Before the University of Oxford, in Lent Term, 1872
Ruskin, John
Art and science
14. For example of the contrary of these, in the same art, I cannot give
you one more definite than that which I saw at, I think, the Gaiety
Theatre--but it might have been at any London theatre now,--two years
ago.
The supposed scene of the dance was Hell, which was painted in the
background with its flames. The dancers were supposed to be demons, and
wore black masks, with red tinsel for fiery eyes; the same red light was
represented as coming out of their ears also. They began their dance by
ascending through the stage on spring trap-doors, which threw them at
once ten feet into the air; and its performance consisted in the
expression of every kind of evil passion, in frantic excess.
15. You will not, I imagine, be at a loss to understand the sense in
which the words sophia and moria are to be rightly used of these two
methods of the same art. But those of you who are in the habit of
accurate thinking will at once perceive that I have introduced a new
element into my subject by taking an instance in a higher art. The folly
of rowing consisted mainly in not being able to row; but this folly of
dancing does not consist in not being able to dance, but in dancing
well with evil purpose; and the better the dancing, the worse the
result.
And now I am afraid I must tease you by asking your attention to what
you may at first think a vain nicety in analysis, but the nicety is here
essential, and I hope throughout this course of Lectures, not to be so
troublesome to you again.
16. The mere negation of the power of art--the zero of it--you say, in
rowing, is ridiculous. It is, of course, not less ridiculous in dancing.
But what do you mean by ridiculous? You mean contemptible, so as to
provoke laughter. The contempt, in either case, is slight, in ordinary
society; because, though a man may neither know how to row, or dance, he
may know many other things. But suppose he lived where he could not know
many other things? By a stormy sea-coast, where there could be no
fresco-painting, in a poor country, where could be none of the fine arts
connected with wealth, and in a simple, and primitive society, not yet
reached by refinements of literature; but where good rowing was
necessary for the support of life, and good dancing, one of the most
vivid aids to domestic pleasure. You would then say that inability to
row, or to dance, was far worse than ridiculous; that it marked a man
for a good-for-nothing fellow, to be regarded with indignation, as well
as contempt.
Now, remember, the inertia or zero of art always involves this kind of
crime, or at least, pitiableness. The want of opportunity of learning
takes away the moral guilt of artlessness; but the want of opportunity
of learning such arts as are becoming in given circumstances, may indeed
be no crime in an individual, but cannot be alleged in its defence by a
nation. National ignorance of decent art is always criminal, unless in
earliest conditions of society; and then it is brutal.
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