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
This ambiguity, then, is all the more conspicuous in the case of
symbolical representation for the reason that an image, which carries
a particular significance, only receives the descriptive name of
_symbol_ when such significance ceases to be expressly marked by
itself, or is otherwise clearly emphasized as it is in the case of the
simile. No doubt the ambiguity of the genuine symbol is to this extent
removed in that by virtue of this very uncertainty the fusion of the
sensuous image and its significance becomes a matter more or less of
convention and custom, a feature which is indispensably necessary in
the case where mere signs are used, while on the other hand the simile
asserts itself as something individual, discovered on the spur of the
moment to assist the meaning, and is independently clear, because it
emphasizes the significance alongside of that independence. At the same
time, though no doubt the symbol may be clear enough to those who are
habituated to its use, and whose imaginative life is at home in such
a conventional atmosphere, it is a very different matter with all who
are outside this native circle, or for whom it is now a thing of the
Past; for such it is only the immediate sensuous representation which
is in the first instance seized, and it remains for these in every way
a question of doubt, whether they are to rest satisfied with that which
lies openly before their eyes, or are to accept these as indicators to
yet further imagery or ideas. When, for example, we gaze in Christian
churches upon the _triangle_ in some conspicuous position on the walls,
we at once recognize that the intention is not to place before the
view this geometrical figure simply as such, but rather to draw our
attention to its spiritual significance. If, however, we were to find
it elsewhere we should probably feel equally certain that such a figure
had no reference whatever, either as sign or symbol, to the Trinity.
On the other hand a folk strange to the ideas which have grown up in
Christian countries might easily feel doubts in both cases, and it is
by no means easy for ourselves to determine with equal certainty in all
cases, whether a figure of this kind is to be understood as presenting
us with its literal or symbolical interpretation.