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
107. Well, in order to get at the meaning we may, indeed, now appeal to
physical science, and ask her to help us. How many manner of eyes are
there? You physical-science students should be able to tell us painters
that. We only know, in a vague way, the external aspect and expression
of eyes. We see, as we try to draw the endlessly-grotesque creatures
about us, what infinite variety of instruments they have; but you know,
far better than we do, how those instruments are constructed and
directed. You know how some play in their sockets with independent
revolution,--project into near-sightedness on pyramids of bone,--are
brandished at the points of horns,--studded over backs and
shoulders,--thrust at the ends of antennæ to pioneer for the head, or
pinched up into tubercles at the corners of the lips. But how do the
creatures see out of all these eyes?
108. No business of ours, you may think? Pardon me. This is no Siren's
question--this is altogether business of ours, lest, perchance, any of
us should see partly in the same manner. Comparative sight is a far more
important question than comparative anatomy. It is no matter, though we
sometimes walk--and it may often be desirable to climb--like apes; but
suppose we only _see_ like apes, or like lower creatures? I can tell
you, the science of optics is an essential one to us; for exactly
according to these infinitely grotesque directions and multiplications
of instrument you have correspondent, not only intellectual but moral,
faculty in the soul of the creatures. Literally, if the eye be pure, the
body is pure; but, if the light of the body be but darkness, how great
is that darkness!
109. Have you ever looked attentively at the study I gave you of the
head of the rattle-snake? The serpent will keep its eyes fixed on you
for an hour together, a vertical slit in each admitting such image of
you as is possible to the rattlesnake retina, and to the rattlesnake
mind. How much of you do you think it sees? I ask that, first, as a pure
physical question. I do not know; it is not my business to know. You,
from your schools of physical science, should bring me answer. How much
of a man can a snake see? What sort of image of him is received through
that deadly vertical cleft in the iris;--through the glazed blue of the
ghastly lens? Make me a picture of the appearance of a man, as far as
you can judge it can take place on the snake's retina. Then ask
yourselves, farther, how much of speculation is possible to the snake,
touching this human aspect?
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account