The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's AesthetikHegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Philosophy
The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Aesthetics
observation of the personal emotional state and its singularity,
instead of penetrating and sounding the matter for study, in other
words the work of art, and in doing so bidding good-bye to the wholly
subjective state and its conditions. In feeling, however, it is just
this subjective state void of content which is not merely accepted,
but becomes the main thing; and that is precisely why people are so
proud of having emotions. And for no other reason that is why such an
investigation is tedious owing to its indefinite nature and emptiness,
and even repellent in its attention to trivial personal idiosyncrasies.
(_b_) Inasmuch, however, as the work of art is not merely concerned
with exciting some kind of emotion or other--for this is an object it
would share without any valid distinction with eloquence, historical
composition, religious edification and much else--but is only a work
of art in so far as it is beautiful, it occurred to reflective minds
to discover a _specific feeling for beauty_, and a distinct _sense
faculty_ correspondent with it. In such an inquiry it soon became
clear that a sense of this kind was no definite and mere[60] instinct
rigidly fixed by Nature, which was able by itself and independently
to distinguish the beautiful. As a consequence the demand was made
for _culture_ as a condition precedent to such a sense, and the sense
of beauty as thus cultivated was called _taste_, which, albeit an
instructed apprehension and discovery of the beautiful, was none the
less assumed to persist in the character of immediate feeling. We
have already discussed the way in which abstract theory attempted
to form such a sense of taste, and how external and one-sided that
sense remained. While the critical sense generally of the time when
such ideas were in currency was lacking in the _universality_ of its
principles, as a _specific_ critique of particular works of art it
was less concerned to substantiate a judgment _more decisive_ than
hitherto--indeed the material to effectuate this was not as yet
forthcoming--than to promote in a general way the _cultivation_ of such
a taste[61]. Consequently this educative process also came to a halt
in the region of the more indefinite, and merely busied itself by its
reflections in the fitting out of feeling as a sense of beauty in such
a way that beauty could immediately be discovered whenever and wherever
it might chance to appear. The real depth of the subject-matter
remained notwithstanding a closed book to such a taste. Profundity of
this kind demands not merely sensitive reception and abstract thought,
but the reason in its concrete grasp and the most sterling qualities
of soul-life. Taste on the contrary is merely directed to the outside
surfaces, which are the playground of the feelings, and upon which
one-sided principles may very well pass, as currency. But for this very
reason our so-called good taste is scared by every kind of profounder
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