The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 3 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_ββ_) We have still to add some remarks with reference to that part
of the countenance which is more nearly related to the practical or
sensuous side of natural function, in other words the specific form
of the nose, the mouth, and the chin. The distinction in the form of
the nose gives to the face a variety of configuration and many various
kinds of expression. A keenly cut nose with thin folds[163] at the
apertures we are accustomed to associate with an acute understanding,
whereas a broad and drooping one, or a snub nose that is somewhat
brutish, suggests as a rule sensuality, folly, and bestiality. It is,
however, the function of sculpture to hold itself aloof, not merely
from such extremes, but also the intermediate stages of design and
expression, and refuse consequently to accept, as we have already seen
is the case with the Greek profile, not simply the separation from the
forehead, but also the extreme curve, whether upwards or downwards, the
acute point and the more extended rounding off, the elevation in the
middle and the depression towards the forehead and the mouth, generally
speaking the extreme acuteness and thickness of the nose, setting in
the place of these varied modifications a comparatively indifferent
type, if at the same time one which in a quiet way is throughout
vitalized by individuality.
Second only to the eye the _month_ belongs to the most beautiful
portion of the face, provided that it is formed not so much in express
relation to its natural function as an organ for eating and drinking
as in accommodation to its spiritual significance. In this respect it
only gives place to the eye in the variety and wealth of its means
of expression, and this though it is enabled to express with vital
force the finest nuances of scorn, disdain, envy, the entire gamut of
sorrows and joy through the slightest of movements and the fullest
play of such, and to a similar degree to express the charm of love,
earnestness, sensuous feeling, obstinacy, attraction, and other such
emotions by its state of repose. Sculpture, however, makes less use
of it to express the nuances of particular expression, and, above
all, is bound to keep what is entirely sensuous, and suggests natural
wants away from the form and delineation of the lips. For the most
part, therefore, it models the mouth neither over-full-shaped nor too
spare, for extremely thin lips also suggest a parsimony of emotional
life; makes the underlip more full than the upper, which was also the
case with Schiller, upon the modelling of whose mouth was inscribed
every kind of significance and fulness of temperament. This more ideal
type of the lips in its contrast to the animal snout presents the
appearance of a certain absence of desire, whereas in the case of the
beast, if the upper portion projects, we are at once reminded of the
headlong devouring of food and the grasp for it. Among human beings the
mouth is, when we have regard for its spiritual relation, primarily