The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 4 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_αα_) _First_, there is declamation in the sense of artistic speech.
Declamation was not carried far among the Greeks; intelligibility is
here what is of most importance. We desire to recognize in the tone of
the voice and in the quality of the recitations the characterization
of soul-life in its finest shades and transitions, as also in its
oppositions and contrasts, in short, in its entire concreteness.
The ancients, on the contrary, added a musical accompaniment to
declamation, partly to emphasize rhythm, and in part to increase
the modulation of the verbal expression. At the same time it is
probable that the dialogue was either not at all or only very lightly
accompanied. To the reproduction of the choruses, however, the lyric
association of music was essential. It is highly probable that
singing, by means of its more definite accentuation of the meaning of
the language used in the choice strophes and antistrophes, made the
same more intelligible; only under such an assumption can I myself
understand how it was possible for a Greek audience to follow the
choruses of either Æschylus or Sophocles. I admit that such choruses
might not necessarily present to a Greek all the difficulties _we_
ourselves experience; at the same time I confess that, though I know
the German language well and am not wholly destitute of imagination,
German lyrics written in the same style, if declaimed from the stage,
even with the full accompaniment of song, would still be far from
wholly intelligible.
(_ββ_) A _further_ means of interpretation is supplied by the pose and
movement of the body. In this respect it is worth noticing that with
the Greeks the play of facial expression is entirely absent, by reason
of the fact that their actors wore masks. The facial contour returned
an unalterable sculpturesque image, the plastic outlines of which were
as unable to assimilate the varied expression of particular states
of soul, as to reproduce the acting characters, which fought through
a pathos securely fixed and universal in the nature of its dramatic
conflict, and neither deepened the substance of this pathos to the
ideal intensity of our modern emotional life, nor suffered it to expand
into all the particularization of the world of dramatic individualities
now in vogue. The action was equally simple, for which reason we do
not possess any tradition of famous Greek mimes. Sometimes the poet
himself was actor; both Sophocles and Aristophanes are examples. To
some extent the mere citizen, who was not strictly a professional actor
at all, took a part in tragedy. As a set-off to such difficulties the
choric songs were accompanied with the dance, a procedure which can
only appear frivolous to us Germans in the view we generally take of
the dance. With the Greeks it belonged as an essential feature to their
theatrical performances.