Below is the best information and knowledge about hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics chapter 3 compiled and compiled by the aldenlibrary.org team, along with other related topics such as:: hegel lectures on fine art summary, hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics pdf, introductory lectures on aesthetics hegel, hegel lectures on aesthetics summary, hegel philosophy of fine art summary, hegel aesthetics vol 2, hegel’s three categories of architecture, kant vs hegel aesthetics.
Image for keyword: hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics chapter 3
The most popular articles about hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics chapter 3
Notes: Hegel’s Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics
Evaluate 4 ⭐ (30192 Ratings)
Top rated: 4 ⭐
Lowest rating: 2 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Notes: Hegel’s Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics And Chapter three purports, in its first line, to have finally moved beyond such prefatory questions and ‘closer to our subject, the philosophy …
Match the search results: In [I], Hegel proposes to retain the term ‘Aesthetics’ but only after saying that it isn’t quite ‘appropriate’. From the little he says about aesthetics so far, what is it about the term (aesthetics) that Hegel is uncomfortable with? How does ‘philosophy of art’ help resolve that problem?
Summary: Articles about Hegel’s Aesthetics. Part 3, Section 3 Introduction. 1. The temple of classical architecture needed a god to live in it; sculpture places him before us in plastic beauty and gives to the material …
Match the search results: Hegel’s Lectures on Aesthetics. Part 3, Section 3
Summary: Articles about Lectures on Aesthetics – Wikipedia Lectures on Aesthetics is a compilation of notes from university lectures on aesthetics given by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel in Heidelberg in 1818 and in …
Match the search results: Lydia Moland states that understanding Hegel’s theory of Aesthetics presents a significant challenge with Hegel scholarship due to the nature of the surviving materials on Aesthetics. Although Hegel lectured on art several times [a], he died before he was able to publis…
Hegel’s Aesthetics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Evaluate 3 ⭐ (17906 Ratings)
Top rated: 3 ⭐
Lowest rating: 1 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Hegel’s Aesthetics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Hegel’s Texts and Lectures on Aesthetics; 3. … Hegel’s philosophy of art forms part of his overall philosophical system.
Match the search results:
Hegel’s published thoughts on aesthetics are to be found in
pars. 556–63 of the 1830 Encyclopaedia. Hegel also held
lectures on aesthetics in Heidelberg in 1818 and in Berlin in 1820/21
(winter semester), 1823 and 1826 (summer semesters), and 1828/29
(winter semester). Transcripts of H…
Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics (Penguin Classics …
Evaluate 4 ⭐ (30455 Ratings)
Top rated: 4 ⭐
Lowest rating: 2 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics (Penguin Classics … Hegel’s Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics were delivered in Berlin in the … 2, or 3 months — new Amazon Book Box Prime customers receive 15% off your …
Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics – Penguin Random House
Evaluate 3 ⭐ (11074 Ratings)
Top rated: 3 ⭐
Lowest rating: 1 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics – Penguin Random House No philosopher has held a higher opinion of art than Hegel, yet nor was any so profoundly pessimistic about its prospects – despite living in the German…
Match the search results:
Introductory Lectures on AestheticsIntroductionA Note on the Translation and CommentaryINTRODUCTORY LECTURES ON AESTHETICS
Summary: Articles about Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics – Goodreads The last chapter (V) of the book introduces us to the main categories of art which will make up Hegel’s Aesthetics. There are three phases of artistic …
Match the search results: To resolve this apparent paradox, as Michael Inwood explains in his incisive Introduction, we must understand the particular place of aesthetics in Hegel’s vast intellectual edifice. Its central pillars consist of logic, philosophy of nature and philosophy of spirit. Art derives its value from offer…
Introductory Lectures On Aesthetics: Georg Hegel – Powell’s …
Evaluate 4 ⭐ (33024 Ratings)
Top rated: 4 ⭐
Lowest rating: 2 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Introductory Lectures On Aesthetics: Georg Hegel – Powell’s … Introductory Lectures On Aesthetics by Georg Hegel available in Trade Paperback on … Chapter III: The Conception of Artistic Beauty.
Match the search results: INTRODUCTORY LECTURES ON AESTHETICS
Hegel’s Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, Vol. 1 – Oxford …
Evaluate 4 ⭐ (35109 Ratings)
Top rated: 4 ⭐
Lowest rating: 2 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Hegel’s Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, Vol. 1 – Oxford … Hegel’s Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, Vol. 1. Sir Thomas Malcolm Knox (ed.) Publisher: Oxford University Press. Published in print: 1975.
Match the search results: Hegel’s Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, Vol. 2
Introductory lectures on aesthetics (eBook, 1993) [WorldCat.org]
Evaluate 4 ⭐ (37452 Ratings)
Top rated: 4 ⭐
Lowest rating: 2 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Introductory lectures on aesthetics (eBook, 1993) [WorldCat.org] Get this from a library! Introductory lectures on aesthetics. [Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel; Bernard Bosanquet; M J Inwood]
Match the search results: Christianity had compromised the immediacy of man’s relationship with reality, and ironic detachment had alienated him from his deepest feelings. Hegel’s “Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics” were delivered in Berlin in the 1820s, and stand as a passionately argued work that challenged the ability o…
Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics by Georg Wilhelm …
Evaluate 3 ⭐ (17633 Ratings)
Top rated: 3 ⭐
Lowest rating: 1 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics by Georg Wilhelm … Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, a late 18th and early 19th century German philosopher, was one of the foremost thinkers of German Idealism. His historicist.
Match the search results: Chapter III: The Conception of Artistic Beauty Part I – The Work of Art as Made and as Sensuous1. Work of Art as Product of Human Activity[(a) Conscious Production by Rule(b) Artistic Inspiration(c) Dignity of Production by Man(d) Man’s Need to produce Works of Art]2. Work of Art as addr…
Aesthetics Lectures on Fine Art: Volume 1. – PhilPapers
Evaluate 3 ⭐ (5558 Ratings)
Top rated: 3 ⭐
Lowest rating: 1 ⭐
Summary: Articles about Aesthetics Lectures on Fine Art: Volume 1. – PhilPapers The substantial Introduction is Hegel’s best exposition of his general philosophy of art, and provides the ideal way into his Aesthetics. In Part I he …
Match the search results:
How can I increase my downloads?
Multi-read content hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics chapter 3
Lectures on Aesthetics by G.W.F. hegel Part III From the romantic art form Introduction – about romance in general
1. The principle of inner subjectivity – 2. Ideas and forms form the basis of romantic art. – 3. Of special methods of representation.
Now, as in the previous parts of our inquiry, in the Art of Romance the form is determined by the inner idea of the content or substance which this art is called upon to represent. Next, therefore, we must attempt to clarify the principle of characterizing new contents which are revealed and appropriate to consciousness as its absolute essence of truth in this new era of human thought development. art form.
From the beginning of art there has been a tendency for the imagination to struggle from the natural to the spiritual. But still the struggle is nothing other than the longing of the spirit, and since this cannot give art precise content, true art can serve only to give outward form to purely natural or impersonal meanings. Abstraction of the important inner principle that forms the center of the world.
In classical art, however, we see exactly the opposite. Here spirituality, though struggling for the first time for conscious existence through the rejection or repudiation of mere natural meanings, remains the basis and principle of content. it is a natural phenomenon that cannot be separated from matter and sensation. It’s the outer form. However, as in the first period, this form is not infinite, not subject to the spirit. Here, on the other hand, the perfection of art is attained by the spirit fully permeating its outward expression, to the point of idealizing the natural in that beautiful union with it, and becoming the measure of the spirit’s reality in its inner individuality. . For this reason, classical art created the absolutely perfect representation of the ideal, the ultimate perfection in the field of beauty. There is and cannot be anything more beautiful.
But there is something even higher than the simply beautiful expression of the mind in its immediately sentient form, although that form is formed by the mind in its own likeness. As to precisely this union of matter and form thus accomplished in the external factor, thereby elevating sensitive reality to full existence but contradicting the notion of reality, mental labor pushed out of its reconciliation with matter into herself, and forced to find his own true atonement within himself. The simple, pure whole of the ideal (as found in the sutras) dissolves and falls into the dual whole of self-existing subjectivity on the one hand and external manifestation on the other to pass through this separation, the mind. deeper reconciliation in his own pure inner or spiritual element. The essence of the mind is agreement with itself (self-identification), uniqueness of its ideas with the same perception. Therefore this spirit can only find a reality (existence) corresponding to the spirit in its own world, the spiritual world or the inner world of the soul. The spirit thus consciously takes possession of its other, its existence as spirit, with and with itself and thus enjoys its infinity and freedom for the first time.
The mind thus arises of itself, or attains self-awareness, and thus finds within itself its own objectivity, which it was previously compelled to seek in external bodily forms of existence, external and emotional. From there it takes and recognizes itself in union with itself; and this clear self-confidence is the basic principle of romantic art. But the necessary consequence of this is that in the last stage of artistic development the beauty of the classical ideal, which is beauty in its most perfect form and in its purest essence, can no longer be regarded as final; for the spirit now knows that its true nature is not a physical form. It understands that part of its essence is renouncing this external reality in order to return to itself, and explicitly identifies or accepts external reality as an existence incapable of fully representing the mind. But if this new content intends to make itself beautiful, then it is clear that beauty in the sense that we have been considering so far for this content is still something of a restraint, inferiority and inferiority, and evolving into the spiritual Beauty of the basic inner self – into the beauty of that spiritual subjectivity or personality which is itself (i.e. capable) infinite.
But in order that this spirit may realize its infinite nature, it is more necessary that it rise above mere and finite personality to attain the heights of the Absolute. In other words, the human soul must bring itself into actual existence as a person (subject) with self-awareness and rational will; and this is achieved by overextending yourself with what is absolutely important. On the other hand, what is important, what is real, must not be understood outside of man, nor must it sweep away the anthropomorphism of Greek thought. Instead of man as the actual subject or personality, the principle must become, and thus, as we have seen, anthropomorphism first attains its fullness and final perfection.
II. From these particular elements, related to this basic principle, we now develop in general the range of objects and the form, the changing aspects of which are subject to the new content of romantic art.
Hence the true content of romantic thought is absolute immanence, its proper and complete form is mental subjectivity or conscious personality as independent and free understanding. Now that which is in itself infinite and entirely universal is the absolute negation of everything finite and concrete. It is the simple union with the Self that destroys all mutually exclusive objects, all natural processes with their cycles of arising, passing away and renewal, in short, which put an end to all limits of spiritual existence and dissolve all that is concrete. divine in itself. In this ensemble all gods were dethroned. The fire of subjectivity destroyed them. Instead of plastic polytheism, art knows only one God, one God, absolute independence, as absolute knowledge and determination, subject to free unity with itself, and no longer breaks down into special characters and functions whose only link is the unity of enclosure is mysterious necessity. But absolute subjectivity, or character as such, escapes art and is only accessible to abstract thinking if, in order to become a practical subjectivity corresponding to one’s own ideas, it does not enter an external existence and withdraw from this reality itself. Now this belongs element of reality to the absolute, for the product of the action of the absolute as the negation of the infinite is the absolute itself, as the simple self-union of what is known, and thus immediacy. However, this immediate existence, which is based on the absolute itself, does not show itself as a jealous god who spontaneously dissolves human finiteness with existence, which manifests itself not as an actual divine personality, but as truth. The absolute reveals itself (unlocks itself), thus representing a time in which art can perceive and express itself.
But the external existence of God is not natural and emotional as such, but rather a sensibility raised to an oversensitive, spiritual subjectivity, to a personality, instead of losing its own certainty in its external appearance, yes, only to achieve its own present certainty of reality through its own reality. Hence the god in his truth is not an ideal created merely by imagination. Rather, he places himself between finiteness and the external chance of immediate existence, but knows himself in all this as the divine principle (subject), which is itself infinite, and creates this infinity for himself. Since the subject or person is in fact a manifestation of God, art now has a higher right to use the human form together with the methods and conditions of the environment in general to manifest the Divine Absolute. But the problem that is new for art can only be this: In this form, the inner will not perish in the outer material existence, but on the contrary will return to itself in order to create divine consciousness of God in the individual (subect). . So now the various moments or elements brought to light by the totality of this world-view as the totality of truth itself find their expression in man. And this in the non-natural sense – like the sun, the sky, the stars and so on. – gives value to content and form, neither to the divine circle of the Greek beauty world, nor to the heroes, nor to work outside the provinces of family morals and public life, reaches infinite value. Instead, the actual subject, the individual or the person, receives this value, because only in him are the eternal moments or elements of absolute truth, which really only exist as a spirit, individualized in many ways and at the same time consistently reduced. and stick to the consensus.
Now if we compare these traits of Romantic art with the task of classical art in its perfection in Greek sculpture, we find that the plastic forms of the deity do not represent the transcendent movement and activity of the spirit. , and is pervaded by inner independence (being for oneself). The variable and accidental stages of the empirical individual are indeed contained in those high idols, but they lack the reality of the self-sustaining personality, the essence of which is self-knowledge and independent will.
Outwardly this deficiency is revealed in the fact that in the symbols of sculpture the expression of the soul is simply what the soul – namely the light of the eye – lacks. The loftiest sculptures cannot avert their eyes. Their subtle inner being does not emanate from them, nor does a self-knowledge in the mental focus whose eyes bring intelligence. The spirit’s spark comes from outside and encounters nothing that makes it react; it belongs solely to the viewer, who cannot, so to speak, look at forms soul to soul, eye to eye. On the contrary, the God of Romantic art appears as a God who can see, knows himself, grasps his own inner personality, and opens the hidden corners of his nature to admire the spirit. God has human consciousness. The infinite negativity, the soul’s return to itself, nullifies this flow into the body. Subjectivity is the spiritual light that shines on itself, in its previous darkness; and while natural light may shine upon an object, this spiritual light is itself the ground and object upon which it shines, and perceives it as one and the same with itself. But now that the inner Absolute or Spirit is manifesting itself in its actual outer existence in the form of man, and that man is related to the whole world, so inseparable from that manifestation of the Absolute, the multiplicity of objects. belongs not only to the mental and subjective worlds but also to the material and objective worlds, and the mind is self-referential.
Such a constituted reality of absolute subjectivity can have the following forms of content and appearance:
1. As a first starting point we must take the Absolute itself, which as the actual spirit gives itself an external existence (existence), knows itself and acts of its own movement. Here the human form is depicted in such a way that one immediately recognizes that it carries the divine within. Man does not appear as mere man, in the bondage of passions, in finite ends and achievements, as well as in the mere consciousness of God, but as God, self-knowing and universal of God Himself, in life and suffering, birth, death and resurrection, which now to reveal to the finite consciousness what spirit, what is eternal and infinite, really is. This content The art of romance begins in the story of Christ, his mother, his disciples and even the story of all where the Holy Spirit lives, where the whole divine nature is present. For inasmuch as it is God himself who, though universal in himself, appears in human form, this reality is not limited to concrete immediate existence in the form of Christ, but is manifested in all humanity, in which the divine. The spirit becomes eternally present and remains one with itself in this reality. This outpouring of this introspection, this independent and self-suffering being in and with itself of the spirit, is peace, the reconciliation of the spirit with itself in its objectivity. It constitutes a divine world – a kingdom of God – in which the divine possesses the reconciliation of reality with its ideas from the center outwards, is fulfilled in this reconciliation and thus attains an independent existence.
2. But as complete as this identification seems to be grounded in the essence of the Absolute, which is still spiritual freedom and infinity, it is by no means an immediate reconciliation and ready from the center in the everyday. , natural and spiritual reality. On the contrary, it attains perfection only when it elevates the mind beyond the finiteness of its immediate or unrealized existence to its truth, its actualized existence. The mind is therefore separate from itself, in order to guarantee its wholeness and freedom, that is, it distinguishes itself, on the one hand as a being belonging to the kingdom of nature, a part of the mind, but on the other hand limited to both; and on the other hand an entity itself (i.e. potentially) infinite. But even this separation is closely related to the need to liberate oneself from alienation from self – in which the finite and natural, instantaneously exists, the natural heart, is characterized as the negative, the evil, the fundamental and marked by entering the realm of truth and contentment as the only way to quell that anger. Spiritual reconciliation, then, is formed and expressed only as an activity, as a movement of the spirit – as a process in which struggles and conflicts arise; and pain, death, the torment of nothingness, and the torment of spirit and matter (corporeality) make them appear as essential moments or elements. Because in the next position God distinguishes finite reality from himself or eliminates it, finite man takes on the task of elevating himself to God, of liberating himself from finitude, outside of the divine kingdom. , remove the scandal, and through the sacrifice (killing) of this immediate reality, become what God in His human form has made objective reality. Infinite pain depends on the sacrifice of the subjectivity or personality of the individual, suffering and death are more or less excluded from the depictions of classical art – or appear there only as natural suffering – and attain the level of reality needed for the first time in the art of Romanticism.
It cannot be said that the Greeks fully understood death in its essential meaning. For them, then, neither the nature nor the immediacy of spirit in its unity with matter is something negative in itself, and death is for them only an abstract transformation, which inspires neither terror nor fear. It is an end without consequences in view of the unforeseeable consequences for the dying. But when personality (subjectivity) becomes immeasurably important in their spiritual self-esteem, the negation that death carries is the negation of self, which is very important and has that value, and therefore becomes intimidating. So it is a death of the soul, wholly negative, permanently deprived of all happiness, is extreme suffering, and can feel permanently abandoned. The individuality of the Greeks, on the other hand, did not ascribe to themselves this perceived value of spiritual personality and therefore dared to surround death with bright images; for man only fears what is of great value to him. But life only has an infinite value for the consciousness when the human being as spirit and self-awareness is the only being and now abandons himself in well-founded fear to negating (putting) himself through death. On the other hand, the death of classical art did not give it the affirmative importance that it acquired in romantic art. What we call immortality did not attain the dignity of serious conception among the Greeks. As far as the later reflection of subjective consciousness is concerned, immortality at first acquired a deeper meaning for Socrates and satisfied a higher claim. For example Odyssey. XI., verses 482-491), Odysseus of the underworld congratulates Achilles as happier than anyone before or after him because he was formerly glorified as gods and is now a ruler among the dead. Achilles, as is well known, was delighted at this good fortune and replied that Odysseus should not utter any consoling words about the dead. Instead of being a field servant and being poor, serving a poor man for a poor man, instead of directing it here, all the dead disappeared. In contrast, in Romantic art, death is only the annihilation of the natural soul and finite personality; an annihilation works only against what is intrinsically negative; this removes the limitation and thus brings not only the spiritual liberation from their finiteness and inner fragmentation, but also provides spiritual harmony between actual human beings (the subject) with the absolute or ideal human being. For the Greeks only life was asserted, connected with physical, external, natural existence; and death is therefore only the negation, the dissolution of current reality. But in the romantic world view it carries the meaning of absolute negation, that is, the negation of the negative; So when mind emerges from its mere nature and incomplete finality, it proves to be both positive and negative. The pain and death of the dying personality (subjectivity) is reversed into a return to oneself; contentment and happiness; into the reconciled affirmative existence which mind can scarcely secure by simply destroying its negative existence in which, as long as it exists, it is cut off from its own truth and aliveness. This fundamental quality, then, not only refers to the form of death that comes naturally to man, but it is also a process by which the spirit perfects itself in him so that it can really live, notwithstanding this external negation.
3. This third aspect of this absolute spirit world has its representation in man, inasmuch as he does not bring forth immediately in himself the absolute and divine, as godliness, manifestation, nor represents the process of elevation to God and reconciliation with God, but remains within the limits of his own human circle. The finite here forms the absolute as well as the external of nature and its kingdom together with its most limited appearances. In terms of this type of content gathering, there are essentially two attitudes. On the other hand, the spirit – as it has gained an affirmation with itself – declares itself an element of self-justification and gratification on this earth, which it only produces (kerns out) this positive character and allows itself to be satisfied internally asserted. reflect from there. Otherwise, that content is just random content that may not have any value on its own. Because the spirit does not find its true essence in it and can therefore not achieve unity in any other way than through itself, because it dissolves as finite and negated in itself, determines this finitude of spirit and nature.
III. Finally, we must now delve further into the meaning of the relation of this whole to its mode of representation.
1. The literature of romantic art is extremely limited, at least as far as the divine is concerned. Because, as we have already said, nature is deprived of its sacred qualities from the very beginning; Seas, mountains and valleys, springs, springs, time and night, and the universal process of nature have all lost their true value for the representation and content of the Absolute. The images of nature are no longer represented symbolically. They are stripped of the quality that makes their forms and activities fit as attributes of deity. Because all the great questions about the origin of the world – about the origin of the world – from when, from where, about the cause of nature and the creation of man, together with all symbolic and dynamic efforts to process and represent these problems, disappeared as a result of the revelation of God in the Spirit; and even a thousand-colored, merry earth with all its classically formed characters, actions, and events swallowed up in souls, condensed into a single bright spot of the Absolute and its eternal redemption (redemption history). Thus, all content focuses on the inwardness of spirit – based on perception, imagination and soul – which strives for union with truth – and seeks and struggles to create and preserve the divine in the individual (subject). So although the soul is still destined to travel the world, it is no longer just pursuing worldly goals and purposes. Rather, it has the essential purpose and aspiration of man’s inner struggle with himself and his reconciliation with God, and is merely representative of personality and its preservation, along with the equipment to accomplish that purpose. The heroism that can arise here does not mean that heroism makes its own laws, makes rules, creates conditions and transforms, but a submissive heroism that has everything preordained and decided and from then on only the task of adjusting matters remains apply it to the world of existence where the higher principle applies in and to oneself, and ultimately make it of practical value in the affairs of daily life. But since this absolute content appears centered in space in the subjective soul, and so every process that comes to it affects the inner life of the human being, the circle of this content expands again to infinity. An unbridled diversity developed. For although the objective (historical) process we are dealing with does not in itself imply the basic character of the soul, the individual as subject penetrates this process from all sides and illuminates every point in which it manifests itself or in the constantly evolving human dispositions , while still capable of absorbing the whole gamut of nature, is but the mind’s environment and field, and bestows upon it an important purpose. In this way, the history of the soul becomes infinitely rich and can be adapted to the ever-changing circumstances and situations in the most varied of ways. And now, when man for the first time steps out of this absolute circle and immerses himself in the affairs of the world, the range of interests, intentions and inclinations will be still more immeasurable; for the mind has deepened according to this principle and has thus manifested itself in its development with the limitless abundance of inner collisions, distractions and distractions. the stages of development of passion and varying degrees of satisfaction. Though the Absolute itself is quite universal, it is especially known to mankind, which constitutes the inner content of romantic art, and hence all mankind, its priceless and legitimate substance. Art.
2. In fact, it is possible that romantic art as art does not emphasize this content, as symbolism and especially classical art did wonderfully with its ideal gods. As we have seen, this art, as art, revealed teaching, brings forth the content of truth only directly in the art form of imagination, but the content has become available outside the realm of the arts in imagination and sensibility. Religion as a universal awareness of truth in a completely different area (level) forms the essential starting point for art. It lies entirely outside the external expressions of real consciousness and appears in sensible reality as trivial events of the present. For the content of revelation to spirit is indeed the eternal, absolute nature of spirit, which separates from and weakens that nature, manifesting immediately while retaining its level. This level (position) on which this is the outside, insofar as it exists and actually exists (existence), is just a random world into which the Absolute brings itself spiritually and internally, and therefore has really arrived at truth there for the first time . At this stage, the outside is seen as an apathetic element that the soul can no longer trust and has no place to live in. The less the mind attaches importance to this external reality, the less likely it is to find satisfaction in it or to be reconciled through association with the outside as well as with itself.
3. In romantic art, then, according to this principle, the actual mode of expression in external expression does not fundamentally go beyond the concrete, ordinary and present reality, which creates fear of claiming this real external existence. in its finite incompleteness and peculiarity. Here, too, that ideal beauty has disappeared, which negates the appearance of time and traces of transit, in order to replace its hitherto imperfect development with beauty, the blossoming beauty of existence. Romantic art no longer wants to be the free liveliness of real existence, in the infinite rest and immersion of the soul in matter, this life too, in the precious sense its highest price, which turns away from this highest level of beauty, beauty. In fact, it weaves its inner being with the randomness of the outer organization, allowing for a limited scope with pronounced traits of evil.
So in romance we have two worlds. One is the spiritual realm, complete in itself – the soul finding its own reconciliation within itself and now, for the first time, bends around the linear repetition of arising, destroying and renewing, returning to the true circle, returning. -Stop yourself, to the true spirit of Phoenix life. So the other realm of eternity, which cannot be reconciled with the spirit, has now become a purely empirical reality, the consideration of one’s own soul form remains unconsidered. In classical art, spirit dominates and completely pervades empirical expression, for it is itself the form in which spirit attains its perfect reality. Now, however, the inner or spiritual is indifferent to respecting the expressions of the immediate world or the sensible world, because immediacy in itself is not worthy of happiness or soul. The outer and phenomenal things can no longer manifest within; and since she is no longer called to do so, she is left with the task of proving that the object or sensation is an unfinished being and must relate to the spirit, to the mind. and perception ability. , for the essential element. But precisely because of this, art allows externality to reappear for itself and to this extent allows any material to enter the representation unhindered. Even the most ordinary flowers, plants and furniture in the home are accepted, and this is done even in the natural chance of mere existence. At the same time, however, this content has the property that it is only external, it is insignificant and small; that it only gains its true value when it is disseminated by people; and that it not only manifests itself internally or subjectively, but also internally or subjectively, but instead of mixing or merging with externals or matter, it seems only within and reconciled to itself. Driven by the outside, the inside instead of the outside now becomes the manifestation. It is, as it were, invisible and can only be understood by itself; a tone, as if without objectivity or form; a wave on the water, an echo through a world in which and on its heterogeneous phenomena only a reflected ray of this autonomous soul can receive and send back.
We can now sum up in a single word the relation of content and form as it appears in the Romanesque, for here the relation reaches its full character. It is this: only because of the increasing generality and the incessant depth of the soul’s work, the basic principle of his main speech is music and dwells on certain contents of the lyrical imagination. For Romanticism, art was the basic characteristic, so to speak – a tone that epics and dramas also strike, and the touch on artworks as a tangible representation as a universal scent: generalization of the soul; for here soul and soul will speak to spirit and soul through all their images.
DISCLAIMER: We now come to the necessary department set up for the deeper and more accurate development of this third major field of art. The basic idea of romance when it comes to its inner manifestation lies in the following three moments or factors:
1. Such religions form the first circle in which the central point in salvation history – in the life, death and resurrection of Christ – is given. Introversion (reversal) takes on importance here as the main feature. The mind adopts a hostile attitude to and transcends its own immediacy and finality, and thereby, liberating itself, attains infinity and absolute independence within its own sphere.
2. Second, this independence transcends the abstract divinity of spirit and also supersedes finite man’s elevation to God and to the affairs of the mundane world. Here it has become immediately individual (subject), as such affirmed for itself, and there for the nature of its consciousness, as well as for the sake of its existence, the virtues of the character of this affirming personality, namely honor, love, loyalty and courage – that is the goal and the duty of the Knight of Romance.
3. The content and form of the third part can be generally summarized as “Official Independent of Personality”. However, when the personality is developed to the point where intellectual independence becomes its essential advantage, there will also be a particular content in which the personality identifies and shares, sharing with it the same independence, but this can only belong to a formal one Category as it does not imply the true nature of their lives as does the religious truth circle. , to be exact. But on the other hand, the form of external circumstances and situations and the unfolding of events is indeed freedom, the result of which is the reckless renunciation of a life of capricious adventure. Thus we see that the end of romance generally involves the randomness of both the exterior and the interior, and that with this cessation the two elements will disappear. With that we leave the realm of art completely. It seems, therefore, that the need to compel consciousness to attain full knowledge of truth requires the higher forms that art in any form can produce.
(The following part was translated by Bosanquet)
1. Having made the above introductory remarks, it is now time to proceed to our section on matter studies. But we are still in the introduction, and the introduction can do no more than let us scientifically examine the rough outline of the whole course for the sake of explanation. But since we have spoken of art as proceeding from the absolute idea, and even ascribed its ultimate end to the sensitive expression of the absolute itself, we must make this assessment in such a way as to show, at least in general terms, how the particular thematic division derives from the conception of artistic beauty as representative of the absolute. We must therefore try to create a very general idea of this very concept.
It has been said that the content of art is the idea and its form lies in the flexible use of perceivable images. These two artistic aspects must be reconciled into a complete and unified whole. The first attribution to this is the requirement that content provided for artistic expression must represent its expressive nature. Otherwise we only get a bad combination, in which a content does not follow plasticity and external representation when it is forced into this form and a thing of nature is vulgar and in its inherently antagonistic form is supposed to find an appropriate mode of expression.
The second requirement, derived from the first, demands that the content of art itself should not be something abstract. That doesn’t mean it has to be concrete, for the sensual is concrete in contrast to everything spiritual and intellectual, which is inherently simple and abstract. Because everything that has true truth in mind, as in nature, is concrete in itself and, despite its generality, has subjectivity and particularity in it. For example, when we speak of God as only One, such a Supreme Being, we are only imagining the inanimate abstraction of irrational knowledge. Such a god, since he is not himself subject to his concrete truth, cannot buy any material for art, at least not for the visual arts. Therefore, the Jews and the Turks could not represent their God, who could not understand even such abstract knowledge, as positively as the Christians. Because the God in Christianity is understood in his truth, that is also in himself, quite concretely as a human being, as a subject, more precisely as spirit, intellect or spirit. What He is the Spirit is revealed to religious understanding as the Trinity and at the same time as One in relation to Himself. Here is the essential, the general and the particular with their harmonious unity; and only such unity creates the concrete. Now, as content, in order to have truth, it must have this concreteness, and art needs the same concreteness, for a merely abstract universal is not in itself a vocation to concrete expression and to quantity and unity. with himself in it.
Thirdly, if a genuine and therefore concrete content has to have a form and a model that corresponds to it, then this sensual form is no less self-evident than something individual, entirely for itself and a . What is specific about both elements of art, from content to expression, is the point at which both can coincide and correspond; the natural form of the human body, for example, is a sensuously concrete thing capable of representing the mind, being concrete in itself, and expressing itself according to it. We should therefore abandon the notion that it is merely a matter of chance that a real phenomenon of the external world is chosen to give a truthful form. Art does not fit into this form simply because it sees it as existing or because there is no other. The concrete content itself is related to the external factor and we can actually say that it is really the rational expression. But this sensuous concrete, in which a content that essentially belongs to the spirit is manifested, is by its very nature related to the inner; Its external form factor, which makes content recognizable and understandable, has a purely existential purpose for the heart and mind. This is the only way that content and styled art form fit together. Concrete that is purely sensual, of such an external nature, does not have that purpose because of its sole original purpose. The mottled plumage of birds shines invisible, the end of their song will pass inaudibly, Cereus (torch-thistle – “torch-thistle”) blooms only on a dying night, without seeing it, in the wilderness of the forests of the south and these forests , forests of the most beautiful and most luxuriant vegetation, with their sweetest perfumes and smells, no less decaying and rotting delighted. The artwork is not a naïve, egocentric being, but essentially a question, an answer to the sensitive heart, an appeal to emotions and thoughts.
In this respect, the sensuous shaping of art is not accidental, but on the other hand it is not the highest kind of spiritually concrete apprehension either. Thinking is a higher mode of expression through sensuously concrete things. Though in a relatively abstract sense, it is not overnight thinking, but concrete, correct, and reasonable thinking. Whether a given content can express sensuous art in its proper form, or essentially demands a higher and more spiritual incarnation, that is an obvious difference if we consider Christian thought. The Greek god was not abstract but individual, very much like man’s natural form; The Christian God is also a concrete personality, but in a purely spiritual mode of existence, and is called spirit and spirit. Therefore, His entity is essentially inner knowledge and not outer natural form, so that He can only be represented imperfectly but not in its entirety.
But inasmuch as the task of art is to present ideas in sensuous form, and not in such purely ideological or spiritual form, to direct perception, and to see that achievement as valuable, worth, or dignified. and the unity of the two, i. H. of the idea and its plastic embodiment, the degree and excellence of art in attaining its proper realization must depend on the degree of introspection and unity with ideas and forms which it shows as fused into one.
Therefore, the higher truth is that the spirit has taken a form that conforms to the mind’s conception. This results in the division principle of art science. For before the mind can attain any real conception of its absolute nature, it must go through a process of stages based precisely on that idea; and with this development of the content it provides itself, there is a directly related development of visual art forms in which the mind presents itself as an artist with a sense of itself.
This development of the artistic spirit again has its natural two sides. First of all, the development itself is a spiritual and universal development, in that a set of specific worldviews, such as a specific but comprehensive consciousness of nature, man and God, create an art form of their own; and second, this universal development of art is bound to procure within itself the outward form of being and sensation and the defining modes of evocative artistic existence.is a mastery of the essential distinction in the field of art—it is something art. It is true that the necessary forms of artistic expression are, on the one hand, general in spirit and not limited to one medium; while sentient existence contains different kinds of matter. But since this latter part, like the spirit, has a latent idea for its inner soul, henceforth special sensuous substances have a close relationship and secret correspondence with mental difference, spirituality, and other kinds of representational art.
However, for the sake of completeness, our science is divided into three main parts.
First we get a common section. As for its content and subject matter, the universal idea of artistic beauty – that beauty conceived as an ideal – together with its closer relationship to nature and artistic creation, is subjective.
Second, it evolves beyond the idea of a particular partial artistic beauty, inasmuch as the essential differences inherent in that idea evolve into a scale of plastic forms.
In third place is the last piece, whose subject is the personalization of artistic beauty, which consists in elevating art to a sensual perception of its form and perfecting itself as a system of multiple arts and their genres. and types.
2. For the first part, in order to make the sequel easy to understand, we must begin by reminding ourselves that idea about beauty in art is not idea as such, as metaphysical logic understands it. is the absolute, but the idea as it has developed into a concrete form corresponding to reality and has entered into immediate and complete unity with reality. Such an idea, though essentially and really true, is nevertheless truth in its generality without any objective form; but the idea as beauty in art is at once idea when specifically defined in the nature of individual reality, and also as an individual form of reality essentially predestined to embody and manifest ideas. This represents the requirement that the idea and its plastic form be realized as a concrete reality in perfect harmony with each other. Brought to such a form, the idea, as a reality that corresponds to the concept of the idea, is the ideal. First, this question of conformity can be understood in the sense that any idea serves so long as the actual form, whatever form, represents the particular idea, that idea and no other ideas. But if that were so, the necessary truth of the idea would be confused with the mere truth, which is to express every meaning in such a way that its meaning could be easily recognized by creating the form of the form. Ideals are not understood as such. Therefore, any content that can come to a relatively complete presentation by the standards of its own nature does not claim the right to claim the artistic beauty of the ideal. . In such a case, even the presentation will seem poor compared to the ideal beauty.
From this point of view we must state at the outset what could not be proved until later, that the defects of a work of art are not always due to ingenuity. The form error results from the content error z. B. of the Chinese, Indians, and Egyptians in their artistic form, the form of their gods and idols, which never goes beyond the stage of invisibility, or from the ugly and false definition of form, and from the inability to attain true beauty; because their mythological ideas, the content and ideology of their artworks are themselves vague or maliciously deterministic and contain no content in themselves. The more a work of art radiates the true beauty of its presentation, the deeper the content and thought of the work. And in doing so, we should not only perhaps think of a greater or lesser ability, but that what is naturally given in external reality should be imitated and imitated. For certain stages of artistic and performative consciousness, distorting and distorting natural structures is not intentional incompetence and skill, but intentional alteration that arises from the content of consciousness and therefore must have. Seen in this way, there is something that counts as imperfect art, which may well be technically perfect, as well as otherwise in its definition, but proves to be defective in relation to such conceptions of art. , and with ideal. Only in the highest art do idea and expression really fit together, in the sense that the idea in essence is given the external form, namely the real form, because the Italian substantive idea that the form represents is itself real and actual content. It follows, as we have shown above, that the idea must be defined in and by itself as a concrete whole, and thus has its own principles and standards, standards for its specificity and definition in outward appearance. For example, the Christian imagination will only be able to represent God in human form and with human intellectual expression, because here God Himself is fully known, in Him is the Spirit. Determination is, so to speak, the bridge to extraordinary existence. If this determinism is not the totality arising from the idea itself, where the idea is not thought of as self-determining and self-generating, the idea remains abstract – and deterministic, and hence its specific and exclusive method designation principle. Presentation, not for itself, but outside of it. The idea, therefore, although still abstract, even has an external form and is not conditioned by itself. The idea, however, which is concrete, has the principle of expression in itself, and that means the free process of formation in itself. Hence only the really concrete idea can give real form, and this correspondence of the two is the idea.
3. Now that the idea is in this fashion-specific unity, this unity can only enter artistic consciousness through expansion and reconciliation of the peculiarities of the idea, and through this development artistic beauty becomes a totality of specific stages and forms. So, having studied the beauty of art itself and its merits, we need to see how beauty in general breaks down into its particular choices. With that we have the second part, the theory of art forms. These forms find their roots in the different ways of grasping the idea as artistic content, depending on the different form in which it manifests itself. The art forms are therefore nothing but different relations of content and form, which stem from the idea itself and thus form the real basis of the division for this area. For the principle of division must always be included in the conception in which distinction and division are proposed.
Here we must consider three relations of the idea to its external form.
a. First, the Initiating Idea for Art is created to include artistic creations while itself still in its ambiguity and ambiguity, or in the malicious misjudgment of truth. Because it is indeterminate, it does not yet have the individuality required by the ideal; Its abstraction and one-sidedness make its appearance peculiar and flawed. Thus, the first art form was a quest for plastic representation rather than a means of true expression. The idea has yet to find its true form, even within itself, and so remains only a struggle and aspiration. In summary, we can call this form the symbolic art form. Where the abstract idea has its external form outside of itself in the naturally sentient matter, where the process of formation begins and from there outwardly manifests, it cannot separate.
Thus, natural objects are essentially unchanged, but at the same time endowed with the Important Idea as their meaning, so that they are given the vocation to manifest them, and the statement is interpreted as the main body. The idea is already in them. The root of this problem lies in the fact that natural objects carry an aspect within them, that they are able to represent a universal meaning. But since there can be no correct correspondence, this reference can only refer to an abstract quality, such as when a lion is used to denote strength.
On the other hand, the abstraction of this relation gives consciousness the same extraversion of the idea to natural phenomena; and the Idea, having no other reality to express it, manifests itself in all these forms, seeking in them all their instability and disproportion, yet finding them unsuitable to itself. It then moves on to the natural forms and phenomena of reality into amorphous and disproportionate sizes, intoxicating, boiling and fermenting within them, rendering them violent, distorting them, exploding into unnatural forms and striving for the variety, grandeur and splendor of the forms used, to raise phenomena to the level of ideas. Because the idea here is still more or less amorphous and not plastic, but natural objects are very specific in their form.
Here, in view of the incompatibility of the two moments, the relation of the idea to objective reality becomes negative, since the former, by its inner nature, is dissatisfied with such externality and with its inner being. in this exaltation or sublimation beyond this unfinished richness of form there is still universal substance. Through this sublimation, natural phenomena and human forms and events are accepted and held as they are, although at the same time understood as not sufficiently important to them, being much higher than any earthly content proposed.
These aspects can be generalized to characterize the primitive artistic pantheism of the East, which either imposes absolute meaning on even the smallest objects, or forces nature by force to express its views. That is, it becomes monstrous, grotesque, and tasteless, or nullifies the infinite but abstract freedom of the essence idea with contempt for all phenomena. Thus, the meaning could not be fully expressed in the wording, and despite all wishes and efforts, the mismatch of forms and ideas remained unrealized. This can be seen as the first art form – symbolic art with its claim to be its carelessness, mystery and sublimation.
b. In the second art form, which we will call “classic”, the double deficiency of symbolic art has been eliminated. The sculptural form of symbolic art is imperfect because, firstly, the idea in it only becomes conscious in an abstract or indefinite determinism and, secondly, the fit of the imported form should and is repeatedly failed, only abstractly. The classic art form is the solution to this double difficulty; it is the free and complete embodiment of the idea in a form that they consider to be particularly consistent with the idea itself. The idea can freely and completely agree with it. Thus the classical art form was the first to enable the production and intuition of the perfect ideal and establish it as realized truth.
In classical art, however, the agreement between concept and reality is not to be understood in the purely formal sense as the agreement of a content with the external form given to it, but more than that. This could be with the ideal itself. Otherwise, every rendering from nature, and every ornament, landscape, flower, or scene, etc., that constitutes the purpose of a representative picture is immediately determined by agreement what it shows between form and content. In classical art, on the other hand, the specificity of the content included the concrete idea and thus the concrete spirit; for only the mind is the true inner self. Therefore, in order to correspond to such a content, we must search in nature for the essence, the value of which belongs to the nature and reality of mind. It must be the absolute concept that invents the form corresponding to the individual spirit, so that the subjective concept – in this case the artistic spirit – only finds it and gives it as an existence with natural form corresponding to the free individual. Spirituality. That form into which the idea as spirituality – as its own defining spirituality – fits when expressed as a phenomenon of time is the human form. Phenomenology and personality are often criticized as a degradation of spirituality; but art, inasmuch as its aim is to bring the mind before perception in its sentient form, must reach such humanity, for only in its very body can the mind be fully exposed to feeling. Transmigration of souls is a false abstraction in this regard (e.g. depicting the soul independent of a suitable body) and physiology should postulate it as one of the first to postulate that life must have been in its evolution to be human to achieve shape. , as a sensitive phenomenon uniquely suited to Mind (God). The human form used in classical art is not just a sensual existence, but merely an essence and physical form corresponding to spirit, and is therefore free from all the defects of spirit, which is only sensation and the accidental finality of phenomena is. Survive. Therefore, the outer form must be purified to present a content consistent with itself; and again, if the match of meaning and content is absolute, then the spiritual meaning of that content must be of a particular kind. That is, it must be qualified to express itself fully in human physical form without projecting into another world beyond the scope of such expression in evocative terms. This condition entails that the mind is immediately designated by him as a special instance of mind, like the human mind, and not simply absolute and eternal, for mind in the latter sense, the inability to explain itself other than the intellect and to express. be (ed. spirituality should be translated here as spiritual).
From this second point, want again led to the disintegration of classical art and necessitated a transition to the third and higher form, namely the romantic art form.
c. The romantic art form destroys the complete unity between the idea and its reality and repeats, albeit on a higher level, the difference and antagonism of the two aspects, which are not intrinsically artistic. The classic type reaches the highest excellence in which there is the ability to express the sensuality of art; and if it is in any way defective, then generally the defect is in the art, i.e. within the limits of its scope. This limitation includes the fact that such art takes as its object the mind – whose conception is infinite concrete universality – in the form of sensuous concreteness, in the classical period that establishes the perfect union of mental and perceptual existence as a coincidence . from both. Well, in such a union the spirit cannot actually be expressed in its true conception. For spirit is the infinite subjectivity of the idea, which as absolute introspection is unable to find free expression in its true nature so long as it remains transformed into a medium, the body as its very existence.
By fleeing from such a state, the romantic art form in turn dissolved the inseparable unity of the classics, because it gained a meaning beyond the ancient art lexicon and its mode of expression. This we-can – if we recall familiar ideas – coincides with Christianity’s claim to God as God in contrast to the Greek belief in gods, which constitutes the essential and appropriate content of classical art. In Greek art the implicit but not explicit substantive entry was the union of human and divine nature; a unity, precisely because it is wholly instantaneous and indistinct, is capable of full expression in an immediate and perceivable way. The Greek god was the object of a naive intuition and a sensitive imagination. Hence its shape is the shape of a human body. His sphere of power and that of his being are individual and limited. In relation to the subject, therefore, he is a being and a force whose inner being is only a latent unity and does not possess this unity itself as inner subjective knowledge. Well, the higher level is the knowledge of this latent entity, which is implicit in the introduction of the classical art form and is able to express itself perfectly in body form. Raising latent or potential into confident knowledge makes a world of difference. For example, it is the infinite difference that separates humans from animals. Man is an animal, but even in his animal functions he is not potentially and latently limited like animals, but becomes aware of them, learns to understand them and – like the digestive process – to increase them to the science of the self. Consciousness. This means that man breaks the boundaries of merely latent and immediate consciousness, so that for the mere reason that he knows he is an animal, he ceases to be an animal and, like the mind, gains self-understanding.
When, in the above manner, the formerly potential unity between human and divine nature is raised from momentary unity to conscious unity, then the real, the actuality of this content, is no longer rational immediate existence. spiritual, human body form, but self-aware inner wisdom (inwardness, literally “inside”). Christianity now brings God before our intelligence as spirit or mind – not as a specific individual spirit, but as absolute, in spirit and in truth. And for this reason Christianity retreats from the sensitivity of the imagination to the introspection of the spirit, making it, not the physical form, the intermediate existence and reality of significant importance. Therefore, the unity between human and divine nature is a conscious unity realized only through spiritual knowledge and in the spirit. New contents acquired through this unity are therefore not inseparable from the sensuous expression as if conforming to it, but are liberated from immediate existence, which must be viewed as negative, absorbed and reflected into the mental unity. In this way, Romantic art must be seen as art that transcends itself while remaining within art and within the art form.
Hence we can briefly follow the statement that in this third stage the object (of art) is a concrete, free spirit substance functioning to manifest itself as a being, at the mind for the mind’s inner world. Art corresponding to such a material object cannot function for sensory perception. It has to deal with the inner mind connected with its object as if it were itself, with the subjective interior, with the heart, with the feeling that is spiritual, with the longing for freedom in itself and only seek and its find reconciliation. in the inner spirit. It is this inner world that constitutes the content of romance and must therefore find its expression as an inner feeling and in the expression or representation of that feeling. The introverted world celebrates its victory over the outside world in the realm of the outside world and its means, which manifests this victory through its worthless voluptuous exterior.
But on the other hand, this [Romantic] art, like the others, needed an external means of expression. Now spirituality has withdrawn from the outside world and its close proximity to the inner world. For this reason, as in symbolic art, the sensitive exterior of the concrete form is accepted and expressed as something fleeting and difficult to escape. And the same measure is also treated on the basis of subjective finite mind and will, even including the individual’s particular character or will, character, action, etc., or history of fact and essence. The aspect of external existence devotes itself to the unexpected, leaving it to the monstrosities of the imagination, unable to render the given as it is, rather than throwing forms of the external world into a random game or distorting grotesquely. For this exterior no longer has its concept and meaning in its own sphere and in its own medium, as it did in classical art. It has come to find them in their feelings, their expression within themselves rather than outside and their form of reality, and has the power to maintain or regain a state of reconciliation with itself. They have independent form in every situation, in all unnecessary circumstances, in all misfortune and sorrow, and even in crime. The characteristics of symbolic art, then, difference, difference and separation of idea and plastic form are reproduced here, but with one fundamental difference. In the field of romance, the idea, the defect of which in the symbolic case creates a defect in external form, must manifest itself in the mental and emotional medium as complete in itself. And because of this higher perfection, whenever it can seek and attain some true and unrevealing reality other than itself, it withdraws from any suitable connection with the outside.
We can see this in the abstract as characteristic of the symbolic, classical and romantic art forms expressing the three relationships of the idea to its embodiment in the field of art. This includes striving for the future and reaching and exceeding the ideal as a true ideal of beauty.
4. The third part of our theme, in contrast to the two just described, presupposes the idea of the ideal and of art forms in general, since it only involves their perception in specific sensitive media. So it is no longer a question of the inner development of artistic beauty according to its general foundations. What we need to study is how these principles come about, how they stand out from the outside world and how they actualize all the elements contained in the idea. Idea of beauty as a work of art in its own right, and not just of a general nature. What art transfers to the outside is the difference between the idea of beauty and the inside in it. The forms of art in general must therefore continue to manifest themselves in this third part with the character of the fundamental principle that determines the arrangement and definition of some arts; in other words, the art forms themselves contain the same essential modifications that we know as art forms in general. However, the external concreteness that these forms are imparted to by the environment of a sensitive and therefore specific material, affects these forms in a way that causes them to separate into distinct forms and, in particular, to show their consciousness. For each type, its defining characteristic is found in a specific external material, and its reasonable practicality in the kind of description it prescribes. But more than that, these art forms, with all their definiteness, their universal forms, break the boundaries of concrete perception with a particular art form and acquire existence in other arts, albeit in a secondary form. The individual arts therefore belong to one of them specifically to one of the general forms of art and form its full external reality; and they also each represent, in their own outwardly plastic way, the sum total of art forms.
Then, in general, we are dealing with this third major department of beauty in art, for it manifests itself in some arts and in their creations in a world of actualized beauty. The content of this world is beauty and true beauty; as we have seen, the spiritual being in concrete form is the ideal, or more precisely, is the absolute spirit and truth itself. This region, the region of perceptually and sensibly artistically expressed divine truth, is the center of the whole art world. It is an independent, free and divine hardness that has penetrated the outer elements of form and medium and wears them simply as a means of self-expression. However, if beauty manifests itself in this area according to the character of objective reality and is characterized in its individual aspects and elements and allows it to become particularly independent, then the center directs its poles, realized in their respective reality, into its own reflections. Thus one of these extremes becomes objective but mindless, in God’s mere natural protection. At this point the outside has a plastic form as something that has a purpose and its spiritual content, not in itself but in something else.
The other is the Divine within, as it is called, as the various particular subjective existences of God; it is an active and living truth in the consciousness, heart and mind of individual subjects that is not fixed in the pattern of their outer form but has returned to the subjective interior of the individual core. In this way, the divine is simultaneously distinguished from its first manifestation, the divine, and so proceeds to the multiplicity of details that belong to all subjective knowledge – emotion, perception and perception, consciousness and feeling. In the field of related religion, where art is directly related at its highest level, we think of this distinction as follows. First, let us think of natural life on earth in its finitude as partisanship; but second, consciousness makes God its object, eliminating the distinction between objective and subjective. And finally, thirdly, we start from God as corporate devotion, that is, to God as alive and present in subjective consciousness. So, these three main modifications are present in the art world in independent development.
a. The first of the concrete arts, the basic principle of which we must start from, is architecture as a visual art. Its function is to manipulate external inorganic nature to identify with spirit as an artistic outside world. The matter of architecture itself is matter having instantaneous external properties, like a mass subject to the laws of mechanics, and its forms do not deviate from the forms of inorganic natural mechanism, but are merely ordered according to the relations of abstract mind, i.e. with symmetry relationships. In this material and in such forms, ideals such as unrealized spirituality are realized. The reality embodied in them therefore remains as something external to the idea, into which it has not yet entered or which has entered only in order to establish an abstract relation.
For these reasons, the basic form of architecture is the symbolic art form. It is architecture that prepares the way to the full realization of God, and in its service it imparts permanence to existing nature, to separate it from the jungle of existence, the limitation, and the destruction of possibility. This means that it paves the way for God, gives shape to its outer surroundings, and builds its temple as a suitable place to focus the mind and direct it to the absolute objects of God. It creates an encirclement around the gathering of those assembled as a protective measure against impending storms, against rain, hurricanes and wild beasts, and while outwardly showing the will to gather, it is in keeping with artistic principles. With such meaning, it has the power to inspire the material and its forms more or less effectively, due to the defining character of the content it establishes to work more or less meaningfully, specifically or more abstractly, more deeply in its own deep sound , or weaker and more superficial. In fact, a great deal of architecture can attempt to create an artistically adequate existence for such inclusion in form and material. But in such a case it has exceeded its own limits and leans towards the sculptural stage above. For the limitation of architecture lies precisely in the fact that it preserves the inner soul, rather than defying the outer art forms, and therefore has to deal with what can only exist in the world: the soul as something other than its own creation.
b. However, as we have seen, architecture purifies the outside world and gives it a symmetrical order and relation to spirit; and God’s temple, home of his church, is ready. In this temple, then, God secondarily enters the flash of the individual, attacking and passing through the inert mass, while the form is infinitely symmetrical and no longer merely mental, focusing on itself and shaping the appropriate body. Survive. This is the sculptor’s quest. From this artistic aspect, the inner spiritual that architecture can show resides in its sensuous and outer physical form, and to the extent that these two aspects do not predominate, sculpture must be designated as the classical art form as a basic type. For this reason the sensuous itself has no expression here that cannot be a spiritual element, just as sculpture cannot represent unrecognized spiritual content rendered in corporeal form transparent to perception. The sculpture was designed to show us the spirit in the form of the body and instantaneous oneness with stillness and peace; and form should be animated by the content of the individual spiritual. And so the outwardly sensitive matter is no longer controlled here, or merely adjusted to its mechanical properties, as a mass with weight, nor as a form of the inorganic world, nor as unconcerned about colour, etc…; but it is forged in the ideal form of the human figure, and it must be noted that it is in all three spatial dimensions. In this last aspect, with regard to sculpture, we must state that in it first of all the interior and the spirit are revealed in the permanent reproduction and essential completeness of itself. In order to reposition and unify, it is only possible to conform to the external form, which maintains its unity and repositions itself. And this is achieved through the form in its abstract space. The spirit embodied in the sculpture is a self-contained spirit, unbroken in the play of mediocrity and passion; and so its outer form is not neglected for any of the different stages of appearance, but only appears in this one aspect, as the abstraction of space in all its aspects, its dimension.
c. Now that the architecture has built the temple and the sculptor’s hand has bowed to the statue of God in the third position, that god is present to touch the congregation opposite in the spacious room of the temple: his family. Community is the spiritual reflection of such sensuous existence in itself, and is the living subjectivity and inner life that results in the determining principle for the content of art, as well as for the medium to represent it in its outer form, is the materialization ( scattered into various forms, attributes, problems, etc.), the individualization and subjectivity they claim. The solid unity that God has in the sculpture is divided into the different inner lives of the individuals, the union of which is not sentimental but purely ideal.
Only at this stage does God himself become the actual and true spirit – the spirit of His (God’s) church; for He begins here to become the walker; the alternation between His oneness in Self and His consciousness in the realization of the individual and in its separate being, as well as in the universal nature and the union of the innumerable. In community, God is freed from the abstraction of unexplored being and from simple incorporation into a corporeal medium in which the sculpture represents him. And so he is raised into spirit and intellectual existence, into a reflective appearance manifesting essentially as interior and subject. Therefore, the higher content is now the spiritual essence, in absolute form. But the dispersion of which we have spoken shows this together with the concrete spiritual being and the individual personality. Well, the main thing that manifests in this phase is not the serene stillness of God in himself, but the appearance as such, the phenomenon to others, the self-expression. And so, at the stage to which we have reached, the whole of the most diverse subjectivity in its movement and life activity – as passions, actions and things of man, and in general the expanse of human feeling, willing and negation – is an object for its own sake of representational art. In order to correspond to this content, the sensual element of art must express itself as both specially created and adapted to subjective introspection. The medium fulfills this demand that we have for color, musical sound and finally sound as a mere expression of inner perceptions and ideas; and as methods of carrying out the meaning mentioned by these means we get music and poetry. In this area, the sensitive medium that presents itself as divided and globally established is ideal. It therefore has the highest degree of correspondence with the content of art, which is thus spiritual, and the combination of the introspective and perceptive medium develops into an approximation than is possible in the field of architecture and sculpture. The unity that is achieved, however, is a more inner unity, the weight of which is placed entirely on the subjective side and which, in terms of form and content, are forced to materialize and be given away; a mere ideal existence can only be achieved at the expense of the objective universality of the content and its combination with a moment of immediate sensuality. Then art, in which form and content uphold the ideal, abandoned the character of symbolic architecture and the classical ideal of sculpture, thereby borrowing its typology from classical form. The romantic arts have a flexible mode to which they adapt most appropriately. expressed. And they form a whole of art, because the romantic type itself is the most concrete.
(1) The clarity of this third personal artistic sphere can be determined as follows. The first of these, alongside sculpture, was painting. It uses the visibility of this content as a medium for its content and for the plastic representation, insofar as it specializes in its own nature, i. H. developed into color. It is true that materials used in architecture and sculpture are also visible and colored; but it is not, as in painting, such a visibility, not simple light, which is characterized by contrasting with the dark and then combining with the light and giving rise to color. This quality of visibility, itself considered subjective and ideal, does not need, like architecture, the abstract mechanical property of mass at work in the properties of matter, both heavy and sculptural, even the full sensory properties of space when condensed into organic forms. Visibility and rendering belong to painting with more ideal form differences in some color classes, freeing art from a sensuous completeness in space tied to material things by confining it to a flat surface.
On the other hand, the content also reaches the most comprehensive specification. Anything that can find a place in the human heart, such as feelings, ideas and intentions; whatever it is able to form in action – all this material diversity has the potential to enter into the diverse contents of painting. The entire field of concrete existence, from the highest embodiment of spirit to the most isolated object of nature, finds its place here. For it is possible for even finite nature to appear in its particular scenes and phenomena in the realm of art, if only an allusion to an element of spirit renders it relevant with thought and feeling.
(2) The second art with which the romantic genre contrasts is painting and music. Her still sensitive means develop into even more thorough subjectivity and concreteness. Music, too, holds the sensuous as ideal, through the negation and idealization of the personal isolation of a single point, the indifferent exterior of space, the exterior of which painting completely adopts and imitates. The only point through such negation (the exclusion of space) is itself a concrete and positive process of negation within the properties of matter, in the form of movement and vibration of the body, of the physical body within it and in its relation to itself One such metaphorical ideal of matter, which no longer appears as a space but as a temporal ideal, is sound, sensibility is established as negation, with abstract visibility it is translated into hearing, as sound speaks, so to speak. frees the ideal content from its immersion in matter. The earliest introspection of matter and the inspiration of the soul within it provide the means for the introspection of the as yet unidentified mind itself and the soul on which the mind focuses; and finds the word in its timbre for the heart with its full range of emotions and passions. Music is thus at the heart of Romantic art, just as sculpture is the midpoint between architecture and art of Romantic subjectivity. It thus also forms the transition point between the abstract sensitivity to space, such as the use of painting, and the abstract flexibility of poetry. In itself, as in architecture, there is a quantitative relation to understanding, as opposed to emotion and introspection; and its basis, too, is a fixed law of the parts of the tone, their combinations, and their inheritance.
(3) For the third and most spiritual representation of the romantic art form, we must look for it in poetry. Its peculiarity lies in the force with which it acts on the mind and its ideas, the sensual element from which music and painting, on their respective levels, begin to liberate art. As far as tone is concerned, the only external substance that poetry retains is no longer the feeling of sensation itself, but a sign which in itself has no external value. And it is a sign that the idea itself is becoming concrete, not just a sense of vagueness but of its nuances and levels. In this way, sound evolves into words, where the voice itself speaks and is input to represent ideas and conceptions. The purely negative point that the music has developed now appears as a very concrete point, the point that the spirit, the self-confident individual, creates from within itself an infinite space of imagination by connecting it with the characteristic of time. of sound. But this sensuous element, which in music is still an immediate element of inner feeling, is separated from the content of consciousness in poetry. In poetry, the mind defines this content for its own sake and primarily in the form of ideas, and although it uses sound to express them, it regards it only as a symbol with no worth or value. Viewed in this way, the sound can also be reduced to a mere letter, which for the listener, like the visible, is transformed into an expression of the spirit. For this reason, the appropriate means of poetic expression are poetic imagination and intellectual description itself. And since this element is common to all art forms, poetry permeates and develops independently in each art form. Poetry is the universal art of the spirit, which by its nature has become free and is not bound to its final realization in external sensitive matter, but only manifests itself in the external space, in the internal time of ideas and feelings. But it is only at this highest level that art overcomes itself by renouncing the means of harmonious embodiment of the spirit in sensual form and passing from imaginary poetry to ideological prose.
5. We can consider it as the entire articulation of concrete art, namely the external art of architecture, the objective art of sculpture, and the subjective art of painting, sound music and poetry. Various other classifications have been attempted as there are many aspects to a work of art which, as is often the case, are first the classification and then the basis of the classification. For example, sensitive media can be used. So architecture is seen as crystallization; Sculpture as an organic model of the material in its spatial and perceptual totality; color, such as colored areas and lines; while in music space as such enters the point where time has content in itself, until finally in poetry the external medium is reduced to utter banality. Or again, these differences were viewed in terms of their purely abstract properties of space and time. Like their physical medium, such abstract features of artworks can be consistently examined for their peculiarities; but they cannot be regarded as the ultimate and fundamental laws, because each such aspect is itself derived from, and therefore must depend on, a higher principle.
This higher principle which we have found in the art forms – figurative, classical and romantic – are universal stages or elements of the very idea of beauty. For symbolic art attains its fullest reality and fullest application in architecture by giving full meaning of the term and not yet so degraded, yes, the inorganic nature is treated by another art. On the other hand, the classical art form finds its full realization in sculpture, while treating architecture only as the shell of its function and having no developmental power, painting and music as the absolute form of its content. . Finally, the romantic art form conquered painting and music, like poetic expression, as forms of expression that were absolutely appropriate in terms of content. Poetry, however, suits and extends to all types of beauty, for artistic imagination is its very vehicle, and imagination is essential to all productions.
And what the individual arts therefore realize in individual works of art, in their abstract conception, are simply the universal types that make up the idea of self-embodying beauty. It is the outward perception of this idea that will erect the mighty pantheon of art, of which the spirit of beauty is the architect and builder, since it awakens understanding of the natural body, and to complete the history of the world will require the development of its ages .
Home Hegel-of-HyperText @ marxists.org
Video tutorials about hegel introductory lectures on aesthetics chapter 3
Lecture on Hegel’s Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics by Shanon Bell at York University.
Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics (Penguin Classics)
G.W.F. Hegel’s aesthetics, or philosophy of art, forms part of the extraordinarily rich German aesthetic tradition that stretches from J.J. Winckelmann’s Thoughts on the Imitation of the Painting and Sculpture of the Greeks (1755) and G.E. Lessing’s Laocoon (1766) through Immanuel Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment (1790) and Friedrich Schiller’s Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man (1795) to Friedrich Nietzsche’s Birth of Tragedy (1872) and (in the twentieth century) Martin Heidegger’s The Origin of the Work of Art (1935–6) and T.W. Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory (1970). Hegel was influenced in particular by Winckelmann, Kant and Schiller, and his own thesis of the “end of art” (or what has been taken to be that thesis) has itself been the focus of close attention by Heidegger and Adorno. Hegel’s philosophy of art is a wide ranging account of beauty in art, the historical development of art, and the individual arts of architecture, sculpture, painting, music and poetry. It contains distinctive and influential analyses of Egyptian art, Greek sculpture, and ancient and modern tragedy, and is regarded by many as one of the greatest aesthetic theories to have been produced since Aristotle’s Poetics.
Hegel’s published thoughts on aesthetics are to be found in pars. 556–63 of the 1830 Encyclopaedia. Hegel also held lectures on aesthetics in Heidelberg in 1818 and in Berlin in 1820/21 (winter semester), 1823 and 1826 (summer semesters), and 1828/29 (winter semester). Transcripts of Hegel’s lectures made by his students in 1820/21, 1823 and 1826 have now been published (though so far only the 1823 lectures have been translated into English) (see Bibliography). In 1835 (and then again in 1842) one of Hegel’s students, Heinrich Gustav Hotho, published an edition of Hegel’s lectures on aesthetics based on a manuscript of Hegel’s (now lost) and a series of lecture transcripts. This is available in English as: G.W.F. Hegel, Aesthetics. Lectures on Fine Art, trans. T.M. Knox, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975). Most of the secondary literature on Hegel’s aesthetics (in English and German) makes reference to Hotho’s edition. Yet according to one of the leading specialists on Hegel’s aesthetics, Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert, Hotho distorted Hegel’s thought in various ways: he gave Hegel’s account of art a much stricter systematic structure than Hegel himself had given it, and he supplemented Hegel’s account with material of his own (PKÄ, xiii–xv). Gethmann-Siefert argues, therefore, that we should not rely on Hotho’s edition for our understanding of Hegel’s aesthetics, but should instead base our interpretation on the available lecture transcripts.
This is the first of a three part discussion about some of the basic features of G.W.F. Hegel’s philosophy. It focuses specifically on what he means by “rationality” “Dialectic” “history” and “Idea”. These notions are put forward with an eye towards understanding the significance of art and aesthetic theory within his thinking generally.
This is the third in a three part discussion on Hegelian aesthetics. It tries to elaborate on the role of beauty, art \u0026 aesthetics in light of what has already been said about freedom, culture and self-consciousness in Hegelian thought.