The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik — Georg Hegel — John Shaqi
The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_γγ_) A _third_ ground of figurative expression, and one of at
least equal force, may be found in the purely ribald exuberance of
the phantasy, which is unable to set before us an object in its own
outlines for what they are worth, or a significance in its unadorned
simplicity, but on all occasions hankers after some concrete embodiment
cognate with it, or is overmastered by the ingenuity of a personal
caprice, which, in order to escape the commonplace, abandons itself to
the charms of the piquant novelty, a caprice that is never satisfied
until it has discovered for us points of affinity in material the most
remote apparently from that before us, and has thereby related the same
to the most distant objects.
And we may here observe that it is not so much the _prosaic_ and
_poetic_ style generally as the style of the _classic_ world in
contrast with that of later periods which presents such a marked
difference in the pre-eminent importance they attach to genuine or
metaphorical expression respectively. It is not merely the Greek
philosophers, such as Plato and Aristotle, or the great historians and
orators, such as Thucydides and Demosthenes, but also the great poets,
Homer and Sophocles, who, albeit we find examples of the simile in all
them, remain on the whole, and without exception, constant in the use
of their direct form of expression[95]. Their plastic severity and
sterling substance will not permit them such a multifarious product,
as is bound up with the use of metaphor, nor will it suffer them, even
for the sake of gathering the so-called flowers of expression, to waver
fitfully in devious ways from their ideal mintage of the completely
simple and co-ordinate result as of one metal cast in one mould. The
metaphor, in fact, is always an interruption to the logical course of
conception and invariably to that extent a distraction, because it
starts images and brings them together, which are not immediately
connected with the subject and its significance, and for this reason
tend to a like extent to divert the attention from the same to matter
cognate with themselves, but strange to both. The prose of ancient
writers in the extraordinary clarity and flexibility of its utterance
and their poetry in the repose of its completely unfolded content[96],
are equally removed from the frequent use of metaphor by modern writers.