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
that the prosaic consciousness declares itself first in its full bloom,
where, as is the case in the Roman and in later times throughout our
own Christian world, the principle of the subjective freedom of Spirit
is realized in its abstract and actually concrete form.
2. And, _secondly_, the final _aim_ toward which the effort of symbolic
art is directed, and with the attainment of which the symbolic type
is dissolved, is _classical art._ But although we find in this latter
form the true manifestation of art's essence first elaborated, it is
not the first type of art. Rather it presupposes within its content
all the various mediating and transitional stages of the symbolic form
itself. It is quite true that the essential aim of that content is to
reveal the notion as a rounded and self-defined totality, that is in
its concreteness and actuality as the individuality of Spirit; but
the notion is only then able to declare itself in such concrete form
to conscious life after it has passed through a variety of mediatory
stages forced upon it by the abstract conceptions which the nature of
its own initial impulse presupposes. It is classical art, however,
which brings to a close all the mere preliminary experiments of art in
the direction of symbolism and the sublime[25]. And it is able to do
this inasmuch as the subjective spirit finds in it, as its essential
possession, a form truly adequate to its substance, and in the same
way that the self-determining notion creates from its own potency
the individual existence that fully expresses it. When once Art has
discovered its true content, and by doing so found its true form, its
search and striving after both, wherein the defect of symbolical art
consists, is therewith at an end.
If we seek further for a closer principle of division of symbolic
art within the limits of the boundaries on either extreme hitherto
discussed, we shall find the same generally under the modes in
accordance with which it contends with the genuine significances of
art and their truly appropriate forms, the battle that is apparent
in a content which is still striving in opposition to the truth of
art, no less than in a form that is equally inadequate to express it.
For both aspects, although externally united in the identity of one
creation, are neither brought completely together themselves, nor
permeated throughout with the notion of art in its truth; and for this
reason they appear quite as much as contestants struggling to be free
from the defects of their union. We may, in short, describe symbolic
art throughout as a continuous war carried on between the comparative
adequacy and inadequacy of its import and form[26]; and the varied
gradations of symbolic art are not so much kinds of specific difference
as they are stages and phases of one and the same incongruity between
the spiritual idea and its sensuous medium.