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
(_a_) If however knowledge of this kind is really to claim the rank
of _connoisseurship_ of the first class it must be both varied in its
character and of the widest range. It is an indispensable condition
to such that it should possess an accurate knowledge of the well-nigh
limitless field of particular works of art both of ancient and modern
times, some of which have already disappeared, while others are only to
be found in distant countries or portions of the globe, and which it is
the misfortune of our situation to be unable to inspect. Add to this
that every work of art belongs to _one_ age, _one_ nationality, and
depends upon particular historical or other ends and ideas. On account
of this it is indispensable that the finest type of art-scholarship
should have at its command not merely historical knowledge of a wide
range, but knowledge that is highly specialized. In other words, a
work of art is associated with particular[22] detail in a peculiar
sense, and a specific treatment, is imperative to the comprehension and
interpretation of it. And in conclusion this connoisseurship of the
finest class does not merely imply like every other a retentive memory,
but also a keen imaginative sense, in order to hold clearly before
the mind the images of such artistic representations in all their
characteristic lines, and above all, to have them ready for comparison
with other works of art.
(_b_) Within the limits of such a method of study which is primarily
historical[23], distinct points of view will soon assert themselves
which in the contemplation of such works we are not suffered to
lose sight of, inasmuch as they are indispensable to a critical
verdict. Such points of view, as is the case with other sciences the
commencement of which is empirical, are summarized, after their due
collection as separate units and comparison, in general criteria and
propositions, emerging in a yet further stage of formal generalization
in "_Theories_ of the arts." This is not the place to dwell at length
upon literature of this kind; we will merely recall a few specimens
of such work in the most general way. There is, for instance, the
"Poetics" of Aristotle, which contains a theory of tragedy still of
real interest. With still more pertinency among the ancients the
"Ars Poetica" of Horace and the Essay on the "Sublime" by Longinus
will exemplify generally the manner in which this type of theorizing
is carried out. The general theses which are therein formulated are
intended to stand as premises and rules, in accordance with which works
of art ought to be produced, their necessity being above all insisted
on in times of the decadence of poetry and art. They are, in short,
prescriptions to the practitioner. The prescriptions, however, of these
physicians of art were even less successful in their curative effect on
art than are the ordinary ones in the restoration of bodily health.