The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_c_) Inasmuch, then, as classical art comprehends free spirituality
as determinate individuality, and immediately envisages the same in
its bodily presentment, it frequently falls under the reproach of
anthropomorphism. Even among the Greeks, to take an example, Xenophanes
ridiculed the presentation of Gods by means of the sensuous image in
his famous remark, that if lions had been sculptors they would have
given their gods the external shape of lions. Of a similar tendency
is that piece of French wit: God made men according to His image,
but man has returned Him the compliment by creating God in the image
of man. If we consider the matter relatively to the form of art that
follows, the romantic, we may in this respect observe that the content
of the classical form of beauty is no doubt defective precisely as
the religion of art is so; but so little does the defect consist in
anthropomorphism as such, that we may rather maintain, on the contrary,
that though classical art is certainly sufficiently anthropomorphic for
art, for the higher form of religion it is not enough so. Christianity
has carried anthropomorphism to far greater lengths; for, according
to Christian doctrine, God is not merely individuality in a human
form, but a real and singular individual entirely God, and entirely
a real man who has entered into all conditions of existence, and is
no mere Ideal of beauty and art created by man. If our conception of
the Absolute is limited to an abstract Being essentially without any
characterization then, no doubt, every kind of representation vanishes,
but if God is Spirit he must appear as man, as individual subject,
not as ideal human being, but as actual participator in the entire
externality of temporal conditions[132] which pertain to immediate
and natural existence. In other words, from the Christian point of
view, the infinite movement is carried to the extremest verge of
opposition, and only returns to the absolute unity as the resolution of
this separation. The man-becoming of God is incident to this phase or
significant moment of separation; as real and individual subjectivity
it is involved in the difference between unity and substance in its
bare extension, and in this common sphere of temporal and spatial
condition creates the consciousness in and pain of division in order
through the ultimate resolution of such contradiction by the same
means to arrive at eternal reconciliation. And this essential point
of passage in the process, according to the Christian conception, is
inherent in the nature of God Himself. As a matter of fact, God is here
apprehended as absolute and free Spirit, in which Nature and immediate
singularity is indeed proferred us as a phasal moment of a process,
but, at the same time, as one which is necessarily transcended[133]. In
classical art, on the contrary, the material medium is neither killed
nor suffers death, but for this reason also we cannot wholly find in it
the resurrection of Spirit.