The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 4 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
_First,_ we have the simple consciousness, which, in so far as it
wills its substantive content[42] wholly as the unbroken identity of
its particular aspects, remains in undisturbed, uncriticized, and
neutral tranquillity on its own account and as related to others.
This undivided and, we may add, purely formal[43] state of mind in
its veneration, its faith, and its happiness, however, is incapable
of attaching itself to any definite action; it has a sort of dread
before the disunion which is implied in such, although it does, while
remaining itself incapable of action, esteem at the same time that
spiritual courage which asserts itself resolutely and actively in a
self-proposed object, as of nobler worth, yet is aware of its inability
to undertake such enterprize, and consequently considers that it can
do nothing further for such active personalities, whom it respects so
highly, than contrast with the energy of their decision and conflict
the object of its own wisdom, in other words, the substantive ideality
of the ethical Powers.
The _second_ mode under which this ethical content is asserted is that
of the individual pathos,[44] which urges the active characters to
their moral self-vindication into the opposition they occupy relatively
to others, and brings them thereby into conflict. The individuals
subject to this pathos are neither what, in the modern use of the
term, we describe as characters, nor are they mere abstractions. They
are rather placed in the vital midway sphere between both, standing
there as figures of real stability, which are simply that which they
are, without aught of collision in themselves, without any fluctuating
recognition of some other pathos, and in so far--in this respect
a contrast to our modern irony--elevated, absolutely determinate
characters, whose definition, however, discovers its content and
basis in a particular ethical power. Forasmuch as, then, the tragic
situation first appears in the _antagonism_ of individuals who are
thus empowered to act, the same can only assert itself in the field
of actual human life. It results from the specific character of this
alone that a particular quality so affects the substantive content of
a given individual, that the latter identifies himself with his entire
interest and being in such a content, and penetrates it throughout with
the glow of passion. In the blessed gods, however, it is the divine
Nature, in its indifference, which is what is essential; in contrast
to which we have the contradiction, which in the last instance is not
treated seriously, rather is one which, as I have already noticed
when discussing the Homeric Epos, becomes eventually a self-resolving
irony. These two modes or aspects--of which the one is as important
for the whole as the other--namely, the unsevered consciousness of
the godlike, and the combating human action, asserted, however, in
godlike power and deed, which determines and executes the ethical