The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_b_) In the _second_ type of art, which we propose to call
"_Classical_," the twofold defect of symbolic art is annulled. Now
the symbolic configuration is imperfect, because, first, the Idea
here only enters into consciousness in _abstract_ determinacy or
indeterminateness: and, secondly, by reason of the fact that the
coalescence of import with embodiment can only throughout remain
defective, and in its turn also wholly abstract. The classical art-type
solves both these difficulties. It is, in fact, the free and adequate
embodiment of the Idea in the shape which, according to its notional
concept, is uniquely appropriate to the Idea itself. The Idea is
consequently able to unite in free and completely assonant concord with
it. For this reason the classical type of art is the first to present
us with the creation and vision of the complete Ideal, and to establish
the same as realized fact.
The conformability, however, of notion and reality in the classical
type ought not to be taken in the purely _formal_ sense of the
coalescence of a content with its external form, any more than this was
possible in the case of the Ideal. Otherwise every copy from Nature,
and every kind of portrait, every landscape, flower, scene, and so
forth, which form the aim of the presentment, would at once become
classical in virtue of the fact of the agreement it offers between such
content and form. In classical art, on the contrary, the characteristic
feature of the content consists in this, that it is itself concrete
Idea, and as such the concrete spiritual; for it is only that which
pertains to Spirit which is veritable ideality[142]. To secure such a
content we must find out that in Nature which on its own account is
that which is essentially and explicitly appropriate to the spiritual.
It must be the _original_ notion itself[143], which has invented the
form for concrete spirituality, and now the _subjective_ notion--in
the present case the spirit of art--has merely _discovered_ it, and
made it, as an existence possessed of natural shape, concordant with
free and individual spirituality. Such a configuration, which the
Idea essentially possesses as spiritual, and indeed as individually
determinate spirituality, when it must perforce appear as a temporal
phenomenon, is the _human form._ Personification and anthropomorphism
have frequently been abused as a degradation of the spiritual. But
art, in so far as its function is to bring to vision the spiritual
in sensuous guise, must advance to such anthropomorphism, inasmuch
as Spirit is only adequately presented to perception in its bodily
presence. The transmigration of souls in this respect an abstract
conception[144], and physiology ought to make it one of its fundamental
principles, that life has necessarily, in the course of its evolution,
to proceed to the human form, for the reason that it is alone the
visible phenomenon adequate to the expression of intelligence.