The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 4 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
(_α_) Excluding as we shall do for the reasons already given from
our subject-matter the origins of such poetry in Oriental literature,
the material of first and fundamental importance which engages our
attention, as the most valuable phase of genuine tragedy no less than
comedy, is the dramatic poetry of the _Greeks._ In other words, in
it for the first time we find the human consciousness is illuminated
with that which in its general terms the tragic and comic situation
essentially is; and after that these opposed types of dramatic outlook
upon human action have been securely and beyond all confusion separated
from each other, we mark first in order tragedy, and after that comedy,
rise in organic development to the height of their achievement. Of
such a successful result the dramatic art of Rome merely returns a
considerably attenuated reflection, which does not indeed reach the
point secured by the similar effort of Roman literature in epic and
lyrical composition. In my examination of the material thus offered my
object will be merely to accentuate what is most important, and I shall
therefore limit my survey to the tragic point of view of Æschylus and
Sophocles, and to Aristophanes so far as comedy is concerned.
(_αα_) Taking, then, tragedy first, I have already stated that the
fundamental type which determines its entire organization and structure
is to be sought for in the emphasis attached to the substantive
constitution of final ends and their content, as also of the
individuals dramatized and their conflict and destiny.
In the tragic drama we are now considering, the general basis or
background for tragic action is supplied, as was also the case in the
Epos, by that world-condition which I have already indicated as the
_heroic_. For only in heroic times, when the universal ethical forces
have neither acquired the independent stability of definite political
legislation or moral commands and obligations, can they be presented
in their primitive jucundity as gods, who are either opposed to each
other in their personal activities, or themselves appear as the
animated content of a free and human individuality. If, however, what
is intrinsically ethical is to appear throughout as the substantive
foundation, the universal ground, shall we say, from which the growth
of personal action arrests our attention with equal force in its
disunion, and is no less brought back again from such divided movement
into unity, we shall find that there are two distinct modes under which
the ethical content of human action is asserted.