The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik — Georg Hegel — John Shaqi
The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
It is lastly a peculiar characteristic of the beauty of Nature that it
should excite or exercise a harmonious influence over our emotional
life. A mood of this kind is aroused by the stillness of moonlight,
the peace of a valley, through which some brook or other meanders, the
sublimity of the immeasurable storm-tossed sea, the tranquil depth of
the star-strewn heavens. But the significant factor in this case is not
so much to be found in the objects as in the peculiar moods they arouse
in our feelings and affections. On analogous grounds we attribute
beauty to animals, when the expression of their life directly suggests
human qualities, such as courage, strength, cunning, good nature, and
the rest. Such, no doubt, in one aspect of it, truly expresses the
nature of the animals themselves; but there is also our own conception
of its affinity to ourselves, and the mood in which we receive it.
(_c_) However much animal life, as the culminating point of natural
beauty, unfolds its freest expression as a living principle, it
is comparatively narrow in its range and subject to very limited
qualities. The circle of such existence is a strait one; and in this
the predominant interests are those of the satisfaction of natural
instincts such as hunger and sex-attraction. Soul-life, regarded as
the inward principle expressed through external figure, is poor,
abstract, and empty of content. Add to this the consideration that
this inward is not manifested at all as _inward._ The soul in its
essential substance is not revealed by the life of Nature; it is, in
fact, the determining characteristic of Nature that its soul remains
shut in itself, does not, in other words, proclaim itself in its
ideality. As already pointed out, the soul of an animal is not this
ideal unity _self-acknowledged._ If it were otherwise we should have
the manifestation of such personality brought home to others. Only in
the self-conscious Ego do we find the ideal in its simplest terms,
which is itself an ideal medium to itself, knows itself as this simple
unity, and thereby endows itself with a reality, which is not limited
to bodily and sensuous form, but is itself of an ideal character. Here,
for the first time, reality is in possession of a form adequate to
the notion; or rather the notion sets itself up as its own opposite,
makes itself objectively real and finds its own realization in that
objectivity. The animal life, on the contrary, is only _potentially_
such a unity as that in which reality as bodily form is other than the
ideal unity of soul. In self-consciousness we have this unity realized,
whose opposing factors are constituent elements of one transparent
ideality. And it is as this concrete totality of self-consciousness
that the Ego is manifested to others. The forms of animal life
merely enable us through imaginative perception to divine the soul's
existence. Such only possess the troubled semblance of a soul,