The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_γγ_) The line of this limit is most emphasized when the question
is raised as to the end or object of highest rank for the sake of
which the passions have to be purified or men have to be instructed.
This goal has frequently in modern times been identified with _moral
improvement_, and the end of art is assumed to consist in this that its
function is to prepare our inclinations and impulses, and generally
to conduct us to the supreme goal of moral perfection. In this view
we find instruction and purification combined. The notion is that art
by the insight it gives us of genuine moral goodness, in other words,
through its instruction, at the same time summons us to the process of
purification, and in this way alone can and ought to bring about the
improvement of mankind as the right use they can make of it and its
supreme object.
With reference to the relation in which art stands to the end of
improvement, we may practically say the same thing as we did about the
didactic end. It may readily be admitted that art as its principle
ought not to make the immoral and its advance its end. But it is one
thing deliberately to make immorality the aim of its presentation and
another not expressly to do so in the case of morality. It is possible
to deduce an excellent moral from any work of art whatever; but such
depends, of course, on a particular interpretation and consequently on
the individual who draws the moral. The defence is made of the most
immoral representations on the ground that people ought to become
acquainted with evil and sin in order to act morally. Conversely, it
has been maintained that the portrayal of Mary Magdalene, the fair
sinner, who afterwards repented, has seduced many into sin, because
art makes repentance look so beautiful, and you must first sin before
you can repent. The doctrine of moral improvement, however logically
carried out, is not merely satisfied that a moral should be conceivably
deducible from a work of art through interpretation; on the contrary,
it would have the moral instruction clearly made to emerge as the
substantive aim of the work[101]; nay, further, it would deliberately
exclude from art's products all subjects, characters, actions, and
events which fail to be moral in its own sense. For art, in distinction
from history and the sciences, which have their subject-matter
determined for them, has a choice in the selection of its subjects.