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
181. Now, it is customary, and may be generally advisable, to confine
the term 'natural history' to the last two branches of knowledge only. I
do not care what we call the first branch; but, in the accounts of
animals that I prepare for my schools at Oxford, the main point with me
will be the mythology of them; the second, their actual state and
aspect, (second, this, because almost always hitherto only half known);
and the anatomy and chemistry of their bodies, I shall very rarely, and
partially, as I told you, examine at all: but I shall take the greatest
pains to get at the creature's habits of life; and know all its
ingenuities, humours, delights, and intellectual powers. That is to say,
what art it has, and what affection; and how these are prepared for in
its external form.
182. I say, deliberately and energetically, 'prepared for,' in
opposition to the idea, too prevalent in modern philosophy, of the
form's being fortuitously developed by repetition of impulse. It is of
course true that the aspects and characters of stones, flowers, birds,
beasts, and men, are inseparably connected with the conditions under
which they are appointed to have existence; but the method of this
connection is infinitely varied; so far from fortuitous, it appears
grotesquely, often terrifically arbitrary; and neither stone, flower,
beast, nor man can understand any single reason of the arbitrament, or
comprehend why its Creator made it thus.
183. To take the simplest of instances,--which happens also to be one of
the most important to you as artists,--it is appointed that vertebrated
animals shall have no more than four legs, and that, if they require to
fly, the two legs in front must become wings, it being against law that
they should have more than these four members in ramification from the
spine.
Can any law be conceived more arbitrary, or more apparently causeless?
What strongly planted three-legged animals there might have been! what
symmetrically radiant five-legged ones! what volatile six-winged ones!
what circumspect seven-headed ones! Had Darwinism been true, we should
long ago have split our heads in two with foolish thinking, or thrust
out, from above our covetous hearts, a hundred desirous arms and
clutching hands; and changed ourselves into Briarean Cephalopoda. But
the law is around us, and within; unconquerable; granting, up to a
certain limit, power over our bodies to circumstance and will; beyond
that limit, inviolable, inscrutable, and, so far as we know, eternal.
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