The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_γγ_) Thirdly, it is not necessary that the disruption should be
direct, or, in other words, that the action taken solely by itself
should be an act of collision; the fact of collision may well appear
out of relations and circumstances of opposition and antagonism which
are forced upon the mind during the process of that action's execution.
Juliet and Romeo are in love with one another. In the mere fact of
their love there is nothing to suggest disunion. But they are aware
that their families are living in mutual hate and hostility, that their
parents will never consent to the marriage, and they are carried into
collision by virtue of this preassumed situation of antagonistic forces.
We must content ourselves here with these very general remarks upon the
relation which the determinate situation occupies in its opposition
to the universal world-condition. Were we to extend our inquiry into
all the divergent aspects, modifications, and nuances of the subject,
attempting thereby to express an opinion upon every possible form of
situation, this chapter would alone present us with sufficient matter
for discussions of endless prolixity and diffuseness. The discovery of
different situations implies a content of exhaustless possibilities;
and in every particular example the essential question involved is
how such may be adapted to the treatment of any specific art, in true
subordination to the principles and character of such an art. To the
fairy story much is permitted which is forbidden to a more stringent
mode of artistic representation. And we may say that generally the
discovery[322] of the situation is a critical point in the process of
art-production which often presents great difficulty to artists. In our
own days the difficulty of obtaining a suitable subject-matter as a
source for the circumstances and situations which the artist requires
is a common complaint. At first sight it may appear to us more in
keeping with our notion of poet if he borrow from his own resources,
and invent situations himself; but such independence does little to
increase his claims as a creative artist. For the situation does not
directly constitute the spirituality of his work nor indeed give us
its true artistic form: all that it does is to supply the external
material in which as its appropriate medium a character or temperament
is unfolded before us. It is only after working into this external
material in which actions and characters find their starting-point
that the true genius of the artist is actively displayed. The poet
consequently has little or no claim to our thanks for merely having
himself invented this least of all poetical aspects of his production.
He is, in fact, fully entitled to draw as much and as frequently as he
pleases from anything that comes to his hand, whether it be history,
saga, mythos, or chronicle, nay, even from material and situations
which have already been artistically treated. Just as we find in the