The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 4 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Georg Hegel · en
In contrast to both these schools, and in their mastery of the
exposition of fully developed human characters and personality,
the English are exceptionally distinguished; and among them, and
soaring above the rest at an almost unapproachable height, stands
Shakespeare. For even in the cases where a purely formal passion,
as for instance ambition in Macbeth, or jealousy in Othello, claims
as its field the entire pathos[56] of his tragic hero, such an
abstraction impairs by no fraction the full breadth of the personality.
Despite of this restriction of analysis[57] the characters remain
throughout entire men. In fact, the more Shakespeare on the infinite
embrace of his world-stage, proceeds to develop the extreme limits
of evil and folly, to that extent, as I have already observed, on
these very boundaries--of course, not without real wealth of poetic
embellishment--he concentrates these characters in their limitations.
While doing so, however, he confers on them intelligence and
imagination; and, by means of the image in which they, by virtue of
that intelligence, contemplate themselves objectively as a work of art,
he makes them free artists of themselves, and is fully able, through
the complete virility and truth of his characterization, to awaken our
interest in criminals, no less than in the most vulgar and weak-witted
lubbers and fools. Of a similar nature is the style of expression he
makes his tragic characters adopt. It is at once individual, realistic,
emphatically vital, extraordinarily various, and, moreover, where
it seems advisable, it can rise to sublimity and is marked by an
overwhelming force of utterance. Its ideal intensity and its qualities
of invention are displayed in images and simile that flash from each
other with lightning rapidity. Its very rhetoric, here the barren
child of no school, but the growth of genuine emotion and penetration
into human personality, is such that, if we take into account this
extraordinary union of the directness of life itself and ideal
greatness of soul, we shall find it hard indeed to point to a single
other dramatic poet among the moderns whom we are entitled to rank in
his company. No doubt Goethe in his youth made a real effort to achieve
some approach to a like natural truth and detailed characterization;
but in the ideal force and exaltation of passion his rivalry collapses.
The style of Schiller, again, has shown an increasing tendency to
violent methods, the tempestuous expatiation of which lack the true
core of reality for their basis.