The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
To sum up, then, though it is true that under the present condition of
the civilized world a man may act independently for himself in many
directions, the fact remains that in whatever direction he may turn
he is still only a member of a fixed order of society and appears as
such limited in his range rather than the vital representative and
individual embodiment of society itself. He acts necessarily under such
a condition of restriction, and our interest in such a personality, no
less than in the content of his aims and activity, is entirely devoid
of completeness. In the end we are invariably driven to concentrate
our attention on the purely personal interest, how far, that is to
say, he attained success, what was the nature of the obstacles and
complications which, in either, through untoward chance or necessity,
confronted or distracted his progress. And if it is, moreover, true
that our modern personality is of infinite significance when we
estimate the character thus manifested as a spiritual product, in
its actions, sufferings, moral opinions, and conduct that is to say,
it is also true that the moral content which is realized in such an
individual is of a restricted character, rather than, as is the case
in the heroic times, the realization of universal right, custom, and
legality. The individual is no longer the exclusive vehicle and actual
embodiment of these powers as in the previous times.
(_c_) Our interest, however, in and need to have presented us such
a completely realized individuality and living self-dependence will
always persist, however strongly we may recognize the worth and
reasonable nature of the more developed condition of an organized and
trained civic society. It is this necessity which makes us regard
with astonishment the youthful spirit of Schiller and Goethe when
they sought to discover that lost self-sufficiency in the prevailing
conditions of modern times. How do we find in particular this attempt
is made by Schiller in his earliest works? Simply by a rebellion
directed against the whole organic framework of civil society. Karl
Moor, suffering injury from the existing order at the hands of those
who abuse the power entrusted them, has the courage to break the
bonds which bind him to law and order altogether, cuts himself adrift
and creates for himself a heroic situation, in which he appears as
the champion of right, and the self-constituted avenger of wrong,
injustice, and oppression. None the less, how insignificant and
isolated must a private revenge of this kind appear, if we estimate
it from the practical point of view, according to the probability of
its success; and, in fact, in one aspect of it, it already contains
the germ of wrong which can only lead to the criminal act on which
it will fall to pieces. No doubt, as personal to Karl Moor himself,
this is a misfortune, a fatality, however, which, despite the tragical
element in it, can only engraft on mere boys the blight of such a