The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
they occupy a station of complete tranquillity. The Greeks were
fully conscious that it was the poets who were responsible for such
apparitions; and if they believed in them their belief was connected
directly with that spiritual aspect which is equally the possession
of mankind, forasmuch as it is the universal, the very active and
motive principle in the events thus presented. From whatever point of
view, therefore, we consider the matter it is clear that it is totally
unnecessary to import superstition either in our own views or in those
of the Greeks before we can enjoy such poetical representations of
their gods.
(_b_) Such, then, is the general character of the classical Ideal,
whose broader development we shall have to consider more succinctly
when we examine the particular arts. Here we have only to add the
observation that to whatever extent either gods or men are carried
in their positive opposition to the particular and external, yet in
classical art the affirmative ethical substratum must assert itself
as maintained. The subjectivity remains throughout in union with the
substantive content of its powers. Just as in Greek art the natural
element is preserved in harmony with the spiritual and is likewise
subordinated to the ideal content, though it be as adequate existence,
the inward heart of our humanity ever presents itself also in a
thorough identity with the genuine objectivity of Spirit, in other
words, with the essential content of what is moral and true. Regarded
from this point of view, the classic Ideal is unaware of the separation
of ideality from external presentment and of the rending of the
subjective and consequently abstract individual caprice in its various
objects and passions, and it is no less so, on the other hand, of the
abstract universal as thereby created. The foundations of character
must, consequently, always be the substantive, and what is bad, sinful
and evil in the self-housed dwelling of subjectivity is excluded
from classical representations. And above all else the harshness,
wickedness, meanness, and hideousness which finds a place in romantic
art, will be wholly alien to it. It is true, we find many instances
of transgression, matricide, patricide and other crimes against the
love of family and piety treated as the subject-matter of Greek art;
but they are not here regarded simply as atrocities, or, as a little
while since it was the fashion among ourselves, as brought about by
the inscrutability of a so-called fatality which imports the appearance
of a necessary result. Rather, if such transgressions are committed
by mankind and in part ordered and defended by the gods themselves,
such actions are on every occasion presented to us from some point of
view at least in a light which declares a certain justification truly
arising out of the subject-matter itself.