The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_β_) In romantic art, it is true, the breach or dissonance of the
subjective principle is carried further, inasmuch as in it the
exposed contradictions are emphasized and their division can be
preserved. Thus, to take an example, we find the art of painting, in
its representation of the Passion, not unfrequently dallies round
the expression of ribaldry visible in the hideous contortions and
grimaces of tormenting common soldiers; and, in its attachment to
such discordant emotions, especially when depicting what is criminal,
shameless, or evil, permitting the glad serenity of the Ideal to pass
away. Even when such disruption loses its force, we find frequently
that ugliness, or, at least, the absence of real beauty, is set up in
its place. In another school of the earlier Flemish art of painting
the downright directness and truth of the representation, no less than
the inextinguishable confidence of the faith to which it testifies,
tend to assert, in despite of itself, a reconciliation in the feelings
of all who behold it[276]. But such an unyielding result falls[277]
short of the entire cheerfulness and satisfaction appropriate to the
Ideal. However, it is possible also in romantic art, albeit here
the representation of suffering and grief penetrates the soul and
its emotions more deeply than is the case with antique art, that
the delineation may reveal to us a spiritual intimacy, a delight in
resignation, a blessedness in pain, a rapture in sorrow, nay, even
a voluptuous ecstasy in martyrdom[278]. Not only in painting but in
the profoundly religious music of Italian composers, we find this
ecstasy and illumination of grief abundantly expressed. We may, as a
summary definition in romantic art, call it "the smile through tears."
The tears have their origin in affliction, the smile in blithesome
serenity, and consequently this smile through weeping indicates, as it
were, the point of self-repose in the midst of pain and suffering. It
is hardly necessary to add that the smile indicated here is no mere
sentimental emotion, no mere vanity of the subject treated or dabbling
with beauty[279] over painful effects and insignificant traits of
subjective feeling; rather (on its artistic side) it must appear as the
firm delineation and freedom of beauty in defiance of all pain, in the
spirit of what was said of Ximenes in the romances of the Cid, "how
beautiful she was in tears." In contrast to this emotional abandonment
in men is either ugly and repellent, or actually ridiculous. Children,
for example, break into tears at the slightest provocation, and we can
only laugh at them. The tears, however, in the eyes of a man of earnest
and self-contained character, under stress of deep feeling, betray a
very different type of emotion. Laughter and tears can, however, very
readily fall apart as unrelated, and are, as such, falsely utilized as
a vehicle of art in such abstraction; the laughter chorus in Weber's
"Freischütz" may be cited as an example.