The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 3 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_α_) However much, speaking generally--and we may no doubt seek to
enforce our conviction in reference also to the spiritual deities of
sculpture--this spiritual significance is at bottom the emancipation of
individuality--and the remark applies to Ideals also according to the
degree of their ideality and nobility--to that extent as individuals
their distinction from one another is less marked. And the astonishing
thing in the problem of sculpture, as solved by the Greeks, consisted
just in this, that despite of the universality and ideality of their
gods they have none the less preserved their individuality and lines
of distinction; they have done so despite the fact that in certain
directions we are conscious of the endeavour to eliminate hard-and-fast
boundaries and to depict particular forms in their transitional state.
If, moreover, we are inclined to regard individuality in a way that
suggests definite traits as being appropriate to definite deities,
much as the traits of a portrait are so, a fixed type will thereby
necessarily appear to be substituted for a vital creation and art
will suffer accordingly. But this is quite as little in accordance
with the facts. On the contrary we find that their invention in
such individualization and vitalization gained in subtlety just in
proportion as a substantive type lay at the roots of the same.
(_β_) Again, in considering the particular deities, we are inevitably
led to the conviction that one individual is of commanding influence
in determining all these ideal figures. This supreme value and dignity
Pheidias attached in an unrivalled degree to the form and expression of
his Zeus, albeit the father of the gods and mankind, is set before us
at the same time with a blithe and benignant look throned in serenity
of mature age, that is not in the first flush of youth, without,
however, on the other hand emphasizing in the least any harshness of
form or suggesting the feebleness of age. The most obvious parallels in
form and gesture with Zeus are his brothers Neptune and Pluto, whose
interesting statues in Dresden, for example, despite all that they
share with him, nevertheless retain a clear line of distinction--Zeus
himself, by virtue of the benignity of his lofty presence, Neptune, by
virtue of his greater ruggedness, Pluto, who is a kindred type to the
Egyptian Serapis, by virtue of his profounder gloom and melancholy.
Essentially more apart from Zeus are Bacchus and Apollo, Mars and
Mercury, the first pair in their more youthful beauty and the greater
delicacy of their figures, the second more masculine albeit beardless.
Mercury, too, is more robust, more slender in shape, with exceptional
fineness noticeable in the facial traits. Mars is not so much marked
out from the others as Hercules might be in the strength of his muscles
and other parts of his figure, but rather as a more youthful and
beautiful hero of an ideal form.