The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
3. In establishing the position, as we have just done, on the one
hand, that essentially free individuality is the content of classical
art, and, on the other, that a like freedom is the equally requisite
determinant of the form, we have already assumed that the entire
blending of both together, however much it may be presented in the
immediate form, is nevertheless no original unity such as Nature's,
but is necessarily an _artificial_ association made possible by the
subjective spirit. Classical art, in so far as its content and its
form is spontaneity[134], originates in the freedom of the Spirit
that is clear to itself. And for this reason also we may say that in
the _third_ place the artist occupies a position different from that
of his predecessors. That is to say his production declares itself
as the spontaneous _product_ of a man in the full possession of his
senses[135], who as truly _knows_ what he wills as he is _able_ to
accomplish such a purpose; who is consequently obscure to himself
neither in respect to the significance and substantive content of that
which he has resolved to make visible in the form of art, nor finds
himself hindered by any defects of technique from executing the result
aimed after.
(_a_) If we look more closely at this change in the position of the
artist we shall in the first place find this freedom announced to
us relatively to the _content_ in this way, that he does not feel
compelled to seek for it with the restless process of symbolical
fermentation. Symbolic art remains the captive of its travail to
bring to birth and make clear its form to its own vision, and this
embodiment is itself only the original form[136], that is, on the
one side Being in the immediate guise of Nature, and on the other
the ideal abstraction of the universal, unity, conversion, change,
becoming, origination, and passing away. In this original form of
the artistic process, however, art does not come to its rightful
possessions. Consequently, these representations of symbolic art, which
should be expositions of content, remain still themselves riddles and
problems, and merely testify to the struggle after clarity and the
effort of Spirit, which on and on seeks to discover without obtaining
the rest and repose of discovery. In contrast to this troublous
search the content must for the classic artist be presented him as
something _already there_ in the sense that as a thing essentially
positive, as belief, popular opinion, or as an actual event either
of myth or tradition, it is determined for his imagination in all
its essential character. Relatively to this objectively determined
material the artist is placed in the freer relation that he does not
himself undertake the process of production and fermentation, and
pass no further than the impulse after the real significances of
his art, but rather that for him a completely explicit and unfolded
content lies before him which he accepts and freely reproduces from
himself.