Lectures on fine arts by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

       

 

Hegel Aesthetics from “the Introduction to Lectures on fine arts”

Hegel clears four false notions about art in his work “the work of Art as a product of Human Activity”. Besides clearing the objections, he praises the art by providing the aim of art.

The four perceptions about art were following

Firstly, it was known that art is conscious effort of some external object by individual. When that art is known, learnt and pursued, it has granted universal association. So work of art is confined to some rules. Other artists imitate that work of art through prescriptions for their practical applications.

Secondly, work of art is considered as work of talent and genius of a specially gifted spirit. Man has no power to give this talent to himself with self-conscious activity. It is considered superfluous and harmful because it is produced particularly in state of inspiration. This state excited their genius and they transpose the object by their own swing of mood.

Thirdly, work of art is ranked with the external phenomenon of nature and considered below the product of nature. Art is viewed as a dead thing because it encompasses life on surface as compared to nature. Another objection was that the things created by God has surely a higher place.

Fourth and last one is the question that arises on the work of Art. It is one the need that what is man need to produce works of art? There were two objections on the arts. At first, aim of art can be achieved by better means because it’s just a play of fancies. And the other is art satisfy the higher needs which produced from higher impulses.

Hegel gives them ingenious answers to comprehend the true conception of art. He, unlike Plato, presents the ground breaking notions about art and fulfil his duty as a critic.

Demonstration to first notion was that art is a spiritual activity of the artist. He argues that art work is not totally mechanical but the generalities like interesting themes and character dialogue according to standing remain the same.

To clear the second notion, he proclaims, production of art indeed the work of genius but it has technical side too that requires the development of thought. It is not that artist in his mood produce anything but he has to reflect on his mood which need practice and skill. It is essential for the artist to learn the skills, so that he can display the depths of the heart.

He sets forth the defense of art against third notion and rejects the aspect of external existence. As work of art originates from spirit, it goes through the spiritual journey. Elements like a human interest, individual character, an action in its complexity is penetrated in the work of art. So a thing which possess spirituality is higher than any natural product and present the divine ideal. Second argument is conferred is that anything which is living is vanished after completing his life cycle but work of art stands for long time. Third argument which was questioned about the natural production is a divine creation. He indicates that it only restricts the God work to nature only because God exists in man also and God honored by the work of spirit in man.

In answer to fourth question, he says that “man is a thinking consciousness”. Hegel gives his philosophy that the human as spirit duplicate himself in a twofold way. First theoretically and second way through practically brings himself into his own consciousness. Through theoretically as well as inwardly way, he represents, fix and recognize himself to himself and through practical way he produces himself. It’s in the nature of man to alter himself and for this reason he dresses himself.He asserts that the universal need of art is "man rational need to life inner and outer world into his spiritual consciousness as an object in which he recognizes again his own self"

                            Idea of Spirit in the Hegel Aesthetics:

Hegel gave his concept of Idea of Spirit in his work “Development of the Ideal into to the particular form of beauty”. He discussed the three forms of art. These forms of art proceed from Idea. Every form provides true basis of their own domain.

Idea of Spirit in Symbolic art:

Art is the spiritual activity and it brings before mind eye in form of Idea which is in its abstract form. When the art begins, Idea is presented in its bad determinacy and can’t be truly presented. It has not taken a form of anything, so it remains in shape of defectiveness. Idea is something that possess the quality of inwardness and first form of art. This form of art in which idea arises from the depth of heart is called symbolic form of art.

Idea of Spirit is Classical Art:

Classical art gives indeterminate Idea a shape. Idea comes into sensuous existence through a shape appropriate to Idea. The content of Classical art consists of concrete Idea as well as concretely spiritual. Classical art which, based on subjective Concept, is the unification of idea and reality. So the classics manifest the Idea as spiritual in human form. For example, Greek Gods are presented through sensuous imagination in form of Human. They look like human but possess extraordinary powers. So human body counts as natural shape of spirit.

Idea of Spirit in Romantic Art

Romantic form of art disperses the concept of Classical art form and deny the unification of Idea and its reality. It demands a transition from this immediate existence to the known unity or a higher form. Romantic art finds the defectiveness in Classical art for the Idea of spirit. For Romantics, spirit is not manifested in its true nature, if it is embodied in something subjective. Romantics assert that the true element for the realization of spirit is the inwardness of self-consciousness. Romantics coincides with Christianity who believes in the absolute unity of divine. In Christianity, the concept of God as spirit resides in their imagination not as human body which Greek portrays.

So the subject matter of Romantics in arts is the free concrete spirituality which is not bound by any bodily forms and art cannot work for sensuous intuition.

In the nutshell, the three forms of art strive for the attainment of Ideal as the true idea of beauty

Read More

Feminism theorized by Mary Wollstonecraft in her work “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman”

 

Feminism theorized by Mary Wollstonecraft in her work “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman”

In chapter 2 of this work of criticism, Mary discussed the prevailing Opinion of a sexual Character and defend the ingenious argument that the two sexes in attainment of virtue ought to aim at different character.

Following are the matters discussed in this work

Strength of Mind:

Mary present his vindication against those men who don’t think that the women have enough strength of mind in attaining a virtue

Men ignorance:

According to men, women should be remained innocent in the rest of their lives. Men satirizes the women of their follies because they could not hold the passion of women. She called those men having unstable mind.

Education of women from infancy:

Women are being taught from infancy a very little knowledge and what the knowledge is about? It’s about the behavior for temptation of men. This includes cunning, softness of temper, and outward obedience. They are being taught that if they follow it then they will get the protection of men

Individual education:

Mary focuses on the individual education that a child should be given attention to his senses, so that the passion started to generate in him. According to Mary “important task of learning is to think and reason”

Private Education:

Mary was against the private education because it is like spoon feeding. One cannot build his thinking ability. According to her “men and women must be educated, in a great degree, by the opinion and manners of society they live”. She was in favor of both sexes education in a way that the society in which they live, they must be educated about their society. She presents her purpose that only by reasoning, one can become virtuous. So the question arises that how one can become virtuous by reasoning. The fact is, when you are blindly doing things which are not right, then your acts are not virtuous. You are not doing things by rational decisions. It’s also possible that your virtuous act with one can harm the other. And that what private education does, it’s damage your thinking abilities.

Perfect education:

Mary gives her opinion on perfect education. The education makes you independent by the exercise of understanding is perfect. She asserts that the women didn’t endeavor to attain the qualities that men have. Women who got education of temptation is so intoxicating. It’s the curse for women that they degrade themselves for the illegitimate power.

Criticism on writers:

Mary criticizes the writers like Rousseau who wrote on the subject of female education of manners and portray them a weak character. She condemns that type of writers as the useless members of society.

Causes contribute to enslave the mind of women:

Mary raised a voice for women. She discussed the causes which spoil the understanding of women. Women who don’t raise their voice for injustice and equality. Women were supposed to do everything in orderly manners which is the result of disorderly education. They were not supposed to educate equally with men. The only method and education they got is to observe. So, the knowledge gained by observing is lacking in purpose than the knowledge men got.

Where women are lacking?

According to Mary,

                        “women do not pursue any one branch”

Pursuing one branch gives vigor to faculty and clarity of judgement. Then they can see thing clearly and judge well.

Present state of society

Mary draw the comparison between the education of boys and girls. Boys were obliged to spent few years in discipline to be a gentleman while girls are only educated about bodily accomplishment which shows their modesty. If the women were wise intelligent, they had ignored and their faculty is swapped by learning manners. A strong faculty is substituted by weak exercises for simple and so called principles.

Comparison of women with military men:

She cites the example of military men to prove that the education women got is useless. Soldier like women got the knowledge about the world. They both practices the little virtues by showing great attention to politeness. Mary questions the sexual difference, if the education is same why men consider superior. She discerns that the only difference is liberty which men enjoy.

Political remark:

Mary gives her remark by observation on officers. She compared standing armies with the machines who are devoid of depth of understanding. She ridiculed them that they only show gallantry. Just like a woman, they are subjected to please and only live to please.

Misfortunes and consequences faced by both women and military men:

Mary discussed two misfortunes faced by both sexes. Firstly, before acquiring the morals, they got education of manners. Secondly, in spite of getting deep into human nature, they got knowledge of life through observation. Consequences of these misfortunes is that, people got prejudices about them. Authority use them according to their purposes and they blindly obey them without analyzing the problem beyond the surface.

Devaluing the women:

She still carries the argument by blaming the riches and hereditary who makes the women value zero through despotism. She also condemned the men who tyrannize their women like wife, mother, daughter in order to keep their mistress happy.

She gives the solution to end blind obedience which is only achieved by strengthening female mind.

Criticism on the work of Rousseau:

Mary condemn Rousseau by alluding the example of Sophia who is the character of Rousseau work Emile. He portrays the woman as dependent and seductive slave. For Rousseau, woman is the object of desire. And for man, woman is no more than obedient companion. Mary disparages his conception about women by saying that “virtues must be same in quality”. As virtuous are same for both, their conduct should be founded on same principles. Men should not consider women to be inferior. She asserts that if anyone acquire the dignity of conscious virtue, they will be satisfied by their true self. Because life did not provide intense happiness to immortal soul.

Female are subservient to love:

Mary questions that why female always be ready to obey unquestioningly to lust whenever male want? Where is the feeling and desires of women? She said “youth is the season of love”. But after marriage, her charm doesn’t affect the husband. The only education of pleasing is not useful anymore after youth has gone. She said “love, perhaps, the most evanescent of all passions, give place to jealousy and vanity”

Conclusion:

She concludes her work of criticism by saying, it is worthless to learn the art of pleasing. Women should make herself respectable. Only in this way she can live a happy life instead of taking difficulties in order to make others happy.   

Read More

From The Critic as Artist by Oscar Wilde

 

Concepts underlying in the essay “from the Critic as Artist” by Oscar Wilde (Part 1)

This work of criticism is the dialogue between two character who are friends. One is Gilbert who is mainly the mouthpiece of Oscar Wilde. He, as flamboyant character, will present his philosophy of Criticism and second Character is Ernest who questions to Gilbert where he feels ambiguity and also summarize the previous argument. Oscar Wilde uses Dialectical method as Plato used in his book Republic.

Worth of Criticism

Their discussion starts from the Ernest as he was reading a book. Ernest claim that the creative faculty is higher than a critical. But the Gilbert renounce by giving an argument, Artist creation is worthy because the work of criticism makes it a worthy. If there is no criticism, nobody knows the beauties and fault in work of art. And the artist work is not worthy at all.

Spirit of Choice  

There is the discussion on the spirit of choice and Gilbert gives name to it “delicate instinct of selection”. He says that artist give their work of art a fleeting perfection through this spirit. But he gives a witty remark that spirit of choice is a critical faculty. If a person did not possess it, he cannot create anything in art.

Work of art is a self-conscious effort

Ernest said to Gilbert that all great work of art is unconsciously done by artist. Gilbert argues that the all fine imaginative works are self-conscious and well planned. Gilbert gives illustration with the example of poet. Poet did not sing because he wanted to sing but he chooses to sing. Here again spirit of choice comes in a way which artist possess. He then criticizes by defying orthodoxy that the greatest poet who introduces Greek gods of nature as the muses and Apollo has merely introduced the artificial century which they fancied it. He says that “self-conscious and critical spirit are one”.

Imaginations of individual

Ernest asks question from the Gilbert that the greatest poems written in earliest times were the work of imaginative individual or race became it a great work. Gilbert answers in favor of individual that art is not possible without style and style come from unity which the individual hold. He gives the example of Shakespeare that he takes a rough material from Greeks work and give it a style. The age in which Shakespeare wrote now called the Shakespearean age due to his individual style. As gilbert says

“it’s not the moment that makes the man but the man who creates the age”

Critical Age

Gilbert introduces about the critical ages because critical ages also the creative ages. He hits the ground of critical age by saying that when no criticism is produced then an age work is very static, immobile, unmoving and formal type. It means that age possess no work of art at all. According to him creative age depends upon the critic and critic doesn’t depends upon on creative art because critic found new forms in work of art.

He appreciated the work of Greek because they were perfect and invented the forms like the epic, the lyric, and even drama. He deliberately extracts the forms which were not produced in the Greeks like sonnet, American Journalism and ballad. He again gave an honor to critical faculty for finding something new in creative artist. Because creative artist also doesn’t know that he creative at all.

Mediocrity in modern Criticism

Ernest asked about the most modern criticism that it is perfectly valueless why? Then Gilbert gave him a witty remark “mediocrity weighing mediocrity in balance”. And he straightforwardly eradicates the reviewer by saying that he is talking about high class critics who writes papers which are being published.

Cultivation of criticism

According to Gilbert, criticism urges more cultivation then creation. Gilbert is really against reviewers that he tagged them misanthropes who didn’t really read a book and if they read it they don’t have a taste of judging them.

For him, only ten minutes are enough for a true critic. Critics have a sense of form of any literary work. Critics are instinctive in judging a work of art.

Words vs Action

Gilbert digresses from the topic and then he moves toward the subject of painting. In Gilbert’s view, painter who objects to criticism but there is no intellectuality in their own work because there is no shift in thought. On this point Ernest interrupts him that it is difficult to do a thing than to talk about it. Gilbert disagrees with him and in inverse told him that talking about something is difficult then doing something. He gives an example of historians who makes history. He told him that how the world came to know about them. It the language who wrote their action in elevated form and add emotions through words.

Rewriters of history

Ernest argued with the Gilbert that critics do nothing but rewrite history. Gilbert agreed at that point gave an ironic comment that rewriting history is not least task because they are giving the way. The ways that man of action chooses. They have never known where their action leads to but critic does. By rewriting the history, critics are actually guiding the humanity. Ernest then called this delusion of action and Gilbert admit it. But in opinion of Gilbert, those who are good or virtuous in their age, afterwards they can become worse or worthless and the ones who are considered evil in their age would become good after many years due to their actions.

Critic is itself an artist    

Ernest in favor of creative artist remarks that creative artist remark that creative artist has higher place than critic because artist introduce to common person with the new worlds. He presents the world more marvelous, more enduring and more true than the gloomy world in which we live is the work of creative artist. So, it creates relationship between Art and Life not between Art and Criticism. Gilbert then give the spry and pointed remark that “Criticism is itself an art” that criticism in highest sense is creative and independent also. Artists are dependent because they need perfection. But critics are independent, they can’t be judged by low standards and don’t even need perfection for their work. A true critic can produce a work that is flawless in beauty. A critic can find his motivation anywhere and anything can serve his purpose. It depends upon critic that how he treats a subject. He is creative artist also because he finds any new forms or elements in any piece of work of art. It’s “creation within creation”

Highest Criticism comes from soul  

In Gilbert opinion, highest criticism is the purest form of personal impression. Outer situation can not restrict them from its true nature. One can point out the work of fiction or fact. But, no one can condemn the work that come from soul and that work is Highest Criticism. So, Highest Criticism is more engrossing than history and philosophy. He says in ingenious manner that “it’s only civilized form of autobiography”. It deals with thoughts of one’s life, spiritual moods and imaginative passion of mind. So Criticism deals with the impressive art not the expressive art.

Criticism is more creative than creation

Last concept, which is not the least, upon which the whole discussion is held is the Criticism is more creative than creation. It is the theory of Gilbert as well as Oscar Wilde. His theory believed in the concept that any beauty gives insights to critics. Critics don’t see beautiful things as aesthetic objects. Thousands thoughts came in mind of critics which the painter of beautiful object himself doesn’t think.

Misconception about Critics

Gilbert points out the misconception that some people says the critics love to write about the anecdotage of paintings. It is not true because anecdotage doesn’t agitate the imagination or fascinate the critic. Critics always looking for something that they can escape into the wider world.

 

Read More

Question related to document "on the Abolition of English Department" by Ngugi Wa thiog'o

 Q: What reasons was given by the Ngugi on the abolition of English Department?

After the world war II, many colonies got their independence from the British Empire. But the independence was only political not a social, cultural or economic. Imperialism left his impact and effects the minds which was known as Post colonialism. Further literary education and academic institution helped in promoting the cultural imperialism.

Ngugi first proposal was based on the reason of historic continuity of one culture. He suggests that department that are centered on the English language and Literature should be terminate. He argued that the English tradition are rooted in our conscious. He gave an example that their own African writings are converted in English and added in our courses.

 In the sixth point, he gave a 2nd proposal that instead of historical continuity of single culture which is English, there should be a centralization of African culture. And view other cultures in relationship with African culture. He gave an illustration of Caribbean and Afro-American literature that they have played an eminent role in the African renaissance. African people didn’t want pre-eminence of English Literature due to political advantages. In the third point, the question about orientation was arisen which we clear it in the seventh point. He told about the aim that we should orientate ourselves by centralization of African Literature in our university through Kenyan or East African Literature.

Third proposal has been given in the point twelve over the importance of oral tradition. Oral traditions are based on their songs with dances sung in their traditional practices. For them, art is the living tradition. He gave an example that there are verbal and melodic tones in their music. And it encompasses metrical lyrics which are embedded in poetic text. Oral tradition is the whole field of study which consist tale, dance, songs and myths. To keep alive these traditions in upcoming generations, there is a need of these courses in the department. Study of oral tradition expresses the social reality of that culture.

Fourth proposal was given in 13, 14 and 15 point on Swahili, European and modern African Literature. He demands for the free of choice for the extension of representative courses which can be other than English like Russian, German, American or other European.

Q: Is Ngugi rejecting the cultural stream?

A: He has given three reasons that why the literature should be studied in Department. Firstly, it illuminates the spirit which bring a life in people. Second reason is that it shows how to face new challenges in society and third one is that we investigate the possible areas where the development is necessary.

By understanding the purpose of literature, it will be clear that he is not rejecting the western culture but he is mapping and clearing a direction that why African literature is inevitable. He make it understandable without doubt that in our lives European culture has a lot of influence in one hand and Arabic and Asian culture on the other. But our tradition is alive within ourselves in African Literature.

Read More

On the Abolition of English Department by Ngugi wa Thiong'o

 

Points in the essay “On the abolition of the English Department”

On the abolition of the English Department is the criticism on the paper which was presented in the university of Nairobi. Ngugi Wa Thiongo who was not satisfied by the proposal present an argument.

Title of the document is very captivating but we can understand it after reading the other side of controversy. He presented 20 points in this documents. Overview of these points are given below.

1.     1. Give a reference of the paper on which this document is presented

2.     2.  Proposal presented on the development within the Art faculty

3.     3.  Question was raised on problems of values

4.      4. Question the role and status of an English department in African environment

5.      5. Question the Roots of English tradition in the conscious and cultural heritage

6.     6.  Main question on the historic continuity of single culture not African or any other culture

7.      7. Present the aim

8.      8. Suggestions for the set up of African literature and languages

9.      9. African literature as active and alive force

10. 10.  Give a reason that why language and linguistic should be studied in department

11.  11. Type of literature should be offered in Department

12.  12. Art in form of living tradition

13.  13. Swahili literature

14.  14. Freedom of choice in representative Literature (European Literature)

15.  15. Modern African Literature

16.  16. Drama as an integral part of literature

17.  17. Relationship with other department

18.  18. Suggestion for the specialized courses

19. 19.  Envision for an active Graduate school

20.  20.Question the literary excellence and and give importance to representative work.

Q1. Ngugi Wa Thiogo essay “On the abolition of the English Department” is presented against which paper and what was written in that paper? And why he was against the English Department?

Ans. In the first point, he gives us reference and told us that this whole document he is going to present is basically a comment in the paper. Comment is usually a remark which we express in favor of something or against it. That paper was given by the Acting Head of English department at Nairobi University.It was presented on 20th September, 1968 in the 42nd meeting.

The four proposal was presented in that paper which were related to development in the department. Firstly, that the modern languages esp. French should be given place and taught in the university. Secondly, that English should be given centrality due to his historic continuity and role. Thirdly, Department of literature and linguistics should be established. And last one is that, African language should also be placed esp. Swahili.

The fourth point has importance in the paper because that African Literature and culture is now anticipated. There was a lot of debating on that paper because it raised the important question on value, direction and orientation.

Ngugi raise the question about 2^nd proposal which was about the role and status of English Department in African environment and culture. He quoted from the paper that “English has had the long history at this college”

In the above quoted words, the paper is referring towards the rule of West over the Africa and presenting the embedded culture in the mind of African people. Ngugi disagree at that point and demands the abolition of English Department.  

Read More

Criticism defined by different Critics

                                                   Criticism

The word criticism has been derived from the Greek work Kritikos which means able to discern and decide. In its strict sense it means judgement and this sense commonly colours our use of it even when it is most broadly employed. The term criticism more than the mere judgement.

A common man choosing or rejecting a thing applies his critical faculty. But when we are to translate the idea into exact language, it seems difficult, if not possible.

In St. Augustine words:

“If not asked, I know; if you ask me; I know not”

The word criticism has been used in many senses, from “fault finding” (New English Dictionary) to “the distinguish of beauty” (E. B. Browning)

Victor Hugo declared,

“Is the work Good or Bad? _that’s a criticism domain”

Some have taken criticism for appraisal, some for exposition and some for analysis.

The word “Criticism” has been in use as a term since the 17^th Century. Various definitions have given by the critics.

Criticism is “the art of judging or evaluation with knowledge and propriety the beauties and faults of works of art or literature”

                                                                    _Webster’s New International Dictionary

Criticism is “the art of estimating the qualities and character of literary or artistic work; the function or work of a Critic”.

                                                                                             _New English Dictionary

“Criticism, as it was first instituted by Aristotle, was meant a standard of judging well; the chief part of which is, to observe those excellences which should delight a reasonable reader”.

                                                                            _Dryden, Prefaces and Other Essays

Criticism is “the conscious evaluation and appreciation of a work of art, either according to the critic’s personal taste or according to some accepted aesthetic ideas”

                                                         _Shipley’s dictionary of World Literature 1943

Criticism is “the art of judging the qualities and values of an aesthetic object, whether in Literature or the fine arts.”

                                                                                 _Encyclopedia Britanica 11^th Ed.

 “Criticism is that department of thought which either seeks to find out what poetry is, what its use is, what desires it satisfies, why it is written and why read and recited; or which _assesses actual poetry_ (There are) these two theoretical limits of criticism; at once of which we attempt to answer the questions ‘what is poetry?’ and at the other ‘is this a good poem?’”

                                                _T.S. Eliot, the Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism

These definitions distinctively fall into two groups; one giving importance to Judgement, the other, to Impartial Inquiry; the one is the enquiry into what ought to be, the other the enquiry into what is. If we combine them together, we have this definition:

          “Criticism is an intelligent inquiry into a work of art to answer three questions: what has the artist tried to express? How has he succeeded in expressing it? Was it worth expressing?”

(a What has the artist tried to express?

Answer to this question includes the analysis and interpretation of the idea or views underlying the work of art. In this respect, our approach may be impressionistic, comparative, historical, psychological or scientific.

(    How has he succeeded in expressing it?

Answer to this question includes discussion on the medium of artist, and study of techniques and rule governing them. Over legislation has been the bane of official criticism; and originality, especially in work of creative imagination, has been condemned because it did not conform to existing rule. Our approach, in this respect, may be classical, or romantic, giving more importance to tradition or originality respectively.

(c  Was it worth expressing?

Answer to this question implies judgement and decision. Judgement is essential to criticism because intelligent analysis and evaluation depends heavily on the exercise of judgement. A critic may judge either according to his personal taste or according to some accepted aesthetic ideas.

 

                Three main activities of literary criticism

Literary criticism is the discipline of interpreting, analyzing and evaluating works of literature. Literature is most commonly defined as works of writing that have lasted over the years because they deal with ideas of timeless and universal interest with exceptional artistry and power. This can include poems, stories, novels, plays, essays, memoirs, and so on. Each of the three main activities of literary criticism – interpreting, analyzing, and evaluating –gives rise to different questions.
The Interpretive Question: What does this work of literature mean? When we interpret a work, we set forth one or more of its possible meanings. Reading is like a potluck picnic to which the writer brings the words and the readers bring the meanings. Literary works speak to us all in different ways, and one of the pleasures of talking about books is the chance to check out all the different ideas other readers bring to the picnic.
The Analytic Question: How does this piece of literature work? When we analyze a text, we get under the hood to see how the engine operates. Analysis is technical: pulling things apart, examining relationships, figuring out effects. We are not asking what a poem means anymore but how the author makes it click.
The Evaluative Question: Is this work of literature any good? When evaluate a work, we form a personal judgment about its work: Is this a great novel or a rotten one? Why? Does this poem have any value? Why? What does this work of literature add – or subtract – from the world?

Reference

Ahmad, M :Literary Criticism

Read More