The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 2 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
Indeed, to
our vision, it is clear enough that a soul such as this, which is only
at home in a world which, however full of ideas, is not the world of
common experience, and which consequently only feels its grasp slipping
from the stable and paramount centres of activity and aims of this our
actual world, ay, and although it be with heart and soul held in and
associated with that world, yet regards all that is moral there simply
as something which contradicts its absolute destination--we can only
say that such a soul, both in its self-inflicted sufferings and its
renunciations, is from the rational point of view simply mad, so mad
that we can neither feel any profound compassion for it, nor propose
any means of liberation. What is lamentably lacking to a mode of life
of this kind is an object of real substance and valid significance;
what it proposes to secure is an aim wholly personal, an object sought
for by the individual for himself alone, for the salvation of his own
soul, for his own blessedness. Few are likely to concern themselves
very deeply whether an individual, at any rate one of this type, is or
ever will be happy[238].
(_b_) _The inward Penance and Conversion_
The kind of representation, in the same general class of cases which
we shall now contrast with the one above examined, turns aside from
the extremity of merely bodily suffering, as it is also from a further
point of view more indifferent to the purely negative impulse directed
against what is essentially just and right in the actual conditions of
the world; the material of such representations consequently, both in
respect to its content and its form, opens up a ground which is more
conformable with ideal art. And this ground is the conversion of the
_inner_ life of the soul, which only here seeks to express itself in
its _spiritual_ pain, and its change of heart. Here, therefore, we
find in the first place that we have no more of those ever repeated
horrors and barbarities of pain inflicted on man's poor body: and,
secondly, that which we have referred to as the barbarian religiosity
of the soul no longer holds fast to its antagonism as against the
purely ethical aspects of humanity in order to trample under iron foot
in the abstraction of its purely conceptive satisfaction[239], and
in the pain of an absolute renunciation that other kind of sensuous
enjoyment; for the most part its attention is now solely directed
against what is in fact sinful, criminal, and evil in human Nature.
We find here a lofty assurance that faith, this spiritual impulse
towards God, is capable of converting the past action, even though it
be a sin or a crime, into something alien to the man who perpetrated
it, washing it away in fact. This withdrawal out of evil, that wholly
negative condition, which is realized in the individual by the
subjective volition and spirit at once scorning and confounding itself
under its former state of evil--this return to the positive which