Chapter twenty EXPRESSIVENESS A work of art is a single, indivisible sy bol, altho!gh a highly arti"!lated one# it is not, like a dis"o!

rse $whi"h ay also be regarded as a single sy boli" for %, "o posite, analy&able into ore ele entary sy bols'senten"es, "la!ses, phrases, words, and even separately eaningf!l parts of words( roots, prefi)es, s!ffi)es, et"*# sele"ted, arranged and per !table a""ording to p!bli"ly known +laws of lang!age*+ ,or lang!age, spoken or written, is a sy bolis , a syste of sy bols# a work of art is always a pri e sy bol* It ay, indeed, be analy&ed, in that its arti"!lation ay be tra"ed and vario!s ele ents in it disting!ished# b!t it "an never be "onstr!"ted by a pro"ess of synthesis of ele ents, be"a!se no s!"h ele ents e)ist o!tside it* -hey only o""!r in a total for # as the "onve) and "on"ave s!rfa"es of a shell ay be noted as "hara"teri&ing its for , b!t a shell "annot be syntheti"ally "o posed of +the "on"ave+ and +the "onve)*+ -here are no s!"h fa"tors before there is a shell* So far I have dealt syste ati"ally with the aking of art sy bols, every one of whi"h is a +work*+ Now that the prin"iples of their "reation and arti"!lation have been dis"!ssed with respe"t to ea"h of the traditional great di ensions( plasti" art, !si", dan"e, poetry $there ay, $if "o!rse, be others, even other +pri ary ill!sions,+ "ertainly other odes of the ones entioned%, it is ti e to "o e to grips with so e of the a.or philosophi"al proble s whi"h this theory of art raises* In the first

/01

part in -he Power of the Sy bol

part of the book, that was not possible# one "annot "o pletely el!"idate general state ents before their !ses are "lear* 2!t in the end there is an episte ologi"al "hallenge to be et* -here are any psy"hologi"al 3!estions, too, that nat!rally arise, so e of whi"h ight lead right to the heart of anthropology and even biology* S!"h iss!es I shall reserve for a s!bse3!ent work* 2!t, altho!gh this book is not a Psy"hology of Art, it ay to!"h on psy"hologi"al atters, be"a!se so e "hara"teristi" responses of the artist to the es and aterials, or of a per"ipient to a work, show !p the nat!re of art# and to evade s!"h iss!es on the gro!nd that they belong to psy"hology $as Clive 2ell re.e"ted the proble of what "a!sed his +aestheti" e otion+% is to blo"k the progress of syste ati" tho!ght by the artifi"ial barriers of pse!do4s"ientifi" pigeon4holes* A proble belongs to the dis"ipline in whi"h it logi"ally arises and for whi"h its sol!tion is of "onse3!en"e*
-he "entral 3!estions, however, are logi"al and episte ologi"al( $i% 5ow "an a work of art

whi"h does not involve te poral se3!en"e'a pi"t!re, a stat!e, a ho!se'e)press any aspe"t of vital e)perien"e, whi"h is always progressive6 7hat "o !nity of logi"al for "an there be between s!"h a sy bol and the orphology of feeling6 $8% 5ow is the i port of a work known to anyone b!t the artist6 $/% 7hat is the eas!re of good art6 Conse3!ently( 7hat is +good taste+ in art6 $9% 7hat is bea!ty, and how is it related to art6 :; $<% 7hat is the p!bli" i portan"e of art6 I will try to answer these 3!estions in their order*

Plasti" art, like all other art, e)hibits an interplay of what artists in every real "all +tensions*+ -he relations of asses, the distrib!tion of a""ents, dire"tion of lines, indeed all ele ents of "o position set !p spa"e4tensions in the pri ary virt!al spa"e* Every "hoi"e the artist akes 'the depth of "olor, the te"hni3!e's ooth or bold, deli"ately s!ggestive like =apanese drawings, f!ll and l! ino!s like stained glass, "hiaros"!ro, or what not'every s!"h "hoi"e is "ontrolled by the total organi&ation of the i age he wants to "all forth* Not .!)taposed parts, b!t intera"ting ele ents ake it !p* -heir persistent "ontrast affords spa"e4tensions# b!t what !nites the 'the singleness of 3!ality that pervades any good work'is spa"e4resol!tion* 2alan"e and rhyth , the re"ession and f!sion "hapter 81 E)pressiveness /0>

of s!pporting ele ents whi"h takes pla"e so nat!rally and perfe"tly that one does not even know what akes the de"ision between design and ba"kgro!nd, every devi"e that integrates and si plifies vision, "reates the "o ple ent to spa"e4tensions, spa"e4 resol!tions* If that "o ple ent were not steadily apparent, the whole syste of tensions wo!ld go !n4per"eived# and that eans it wo!ld not e)ist, for +spa"e4 tension+ is an attrib!te belonging only to virt!al spa"e, where esse est per"ipi* In a"t!al, "o on spa"e there is no s!"h thing*> Sentient beings rea"t to their world by "onstantly "hanging their total "ondition* 7hen a "reat!re;s attention shifts fro one "enter of interest to another, not only the organs i ediately involved $the two eyes seeing a new ob.e"t, the two ears re"eiving and +pla"ing+ a so!nd, et"*% b!t h!ndreds of fibers in the body are affe"ted* Every s allest shift of awareness "alls o!t a read.!st ent, and !nder ordinary "ir"! stan"es s!"h read.!st ents pass easily one into another* ?nderneath this variable pro"ess of what one ight "all +waking life,+ "onstantly infl!en"ed by things o!tside the "reat!re;s skin, is another se3!en"e of "hanges, ore si ply rhyth i", the syste of vital f!n"tions* 7hether that se3!en"e refle"ts the f!n"tions of o!tward awareness all the ti e, or only when the latter rise above so e parti"!lar degree of dist!rban"e, I do not know# b!t "ertainly, a.or e)"ite ents fro o!tside throw the entire syste ' vol!ntary and invol!ntary !s"les, heart, skin and glands as well as eyes and li bs' into !n!s!al a"tivity* -he sa e thing ay o""!r, at least in h! an beings, not fro o!tward "a!ses, b!t fro "rises in the "ontin!al $if not "ontin!o!s% pro"ess of ideation* 7e know little of the ental life of ani als, and fort!nately it does not "on"ern !s here# b!t "ertainly in h! an life the intelle"t!al and i aginative f!n"tions have a "ontrolling share of infl!en"e on waking a"tivity* In sleep they have probably al ost a onopoly $not 3!ite, at least in ad!lts# for we do learn not to fall o!t of bed'that is, to draw ba"k fro the edge of the attress'and to "ontrol o!r vis"era even in sleep%* >It ay be arg!ed, of "o!rse, that a"t!al spa"e e)ists only by virt!e of physi"al tensions, the differentiations of the ele"tro agneti" field into ob.e"ts and physi"al events* 2!t tensions of that sort are not e)perien"ed as s!"h# on the + olar+ level, whereon a "o parison between a"t!al and virt!al e)perien"e lies, a"t!al spa"e is ho ogeneo!s and stati"* /08 part in -he Power of the Sy bol

-his ental a"tivity and sensitivity is what "hiefly deter ines the way a person eets his s!rro!nding world* P!re sensation'now pain, now pleas!re'wo!ld have no !nity, and wo!ld "hange the re"eptivity of the body for f!t!re pains and pleas!res only in r!di entary ways* It is sensation re e bered and anti"ipated, feared or so!ght or even i agined and es"hewed that is i portant in h! an life* It is per"eption olded by i agination that gives !s the o!tward world we know* And it is the "ontin!ity of tho!ght that syste ati&es o!r e otional rea"tions into attit!des with distin"t feeling tones, and sets a "ertain s"ope for an individ!al;s passions* In other words( by virt!e of o!r tho!ght and i agination we have not only feelings, b!t a life of feeling* -hat life of feeling is a strea of tensions and resol!tions* Probably all e otion, all feeling tone, ood, and even personal +sense of life+ or +sense of identity+ is a spe"iali&ed and intri"ate, b!t definite interplay of tensions'a"t!al, nervo!s and !s"!lar tensions taking pla"e in a h! an organis * -his "on"ept of what is 3!ite properly "alled +inner life+ has already been dis"!ssed in Chapter @# and its i age in the +flow+ of "o posed so!nd is not hard to find* 2!t the fa"t that !si" is a te poral, progressive pheno enon easily isleads one into thinking of its passage as a d!pli"ation of psy"hophysi"al events, a string of events whi"h parallels the passage of e otive life, rather than as a sy boli" pro.e"tion whi"h need not share the "onditions of what it sy boli&es, i*e* need not present its i port in te poral order be"a!se that i port is so ething te poral* -he sy boli" power of !si" lies in the fa"t that it "reates a pattern of tensions and resol!tions* As its s!bstan"e'its pri ary ill!sion'is a virt!al $s"ientifi"ally 3!ite !nrealisti"% -i e, the fabri" of !si"al tensions is te poral* 2!t the sa e sort of pattern "onfronts !s in a non4te poral pro.e"tion in the plasti" arts* -he abstra"tion effe"ted by the sy bol is probably no greater there, b!t it is ore evident* Painting, s"!lpt!re, ar"hite"t!re, and all kindred arts do the sa e thing as !si"* In a book I have already had several o""asions to "ite',ran"is ,er4g!sson;s -he Idea of a -heater'there is a passage that shows how readily artisti" !nderstanding ay dispense with te poral presentation and find its way with the ti eless i age( speaking of the str!"t!re of 7agner;s -ristan !nd Isolde, Professor ,erg!sson says, +7agner has so arranged "hapter 81 E)pressiveness /0/

the in"idents of the story as always to show on stage passionate o ents* -hese s!""essive o ents "onstit!te a se3!en"e, or rhyth of feeling, or $if one thinks of the together, instead of in the te poral s!""ession in whi"h we get the % a spe"tr! of e otions generated by absol!te passion * * *+8 -hat spe"tr! of e otions is the organi&ing +idea+ in the non4te poral arts* -he life of feeling is shown in ti eless pro.e"tion* Anly art, whi"h "reates its ele ents instead of taking the fro the world, "an e)hibit tension and resol!tion si !ltaneo!sly, thro!gh the ill!sion of +spa"e4tensions+ and +spa"e4resol!tions*+ But, although a work of art may abstract from the temporal character of experience, what it renders in its own logical projection must be true in design to the structure of experience. That is why art seems essentially organic; for all vital tension patterns are organic patterns. It must be remembered, of course, that a work of art is not an actual organism, but presents only the appearance of life,

growth, and functional unity* Its aterial "onstit!tion is either inorgani", like stone, dead organi" atter like wood or paper, or not a +thing+ at all* B!si" is a dist!rban"e of the air* Poetry is the sa e, !nless it is a trail of ink* 2!t .!st be"a!se the "reated appearan"e is all that has organi" str!"t!re, a work of art shows !s the appearan"e of life# and the se blan"e of f!n"tional !nity is indispensable if the ill!sory tension pattern is to "onnote felt tensions, h! an e)perien"e* -e"hni"ally, this eans that every ele ent !st see at on"e distin"t, i*e* itself, and also "ontin!o!s with a greater, self4s!stained for $"f* 5ildebrand;s analysis of pi"torial spa"e, "hapter <%# this integral relationship is, I think, what prod!"es the oft4re arked 3!ality of +livingness+ in all s!""essf!l works* And be"a!se art is a sy boli" presentation and not a "opy of feeling, there "an be as !"h knowledge of feeling pro.e"ted into the ti eless arti"!lated for of a painting, or a stained glass window, or a s!btly proportioned Creek te ple, as into the flowing for s of !si", dan"e, or re"itation* if feeling and e otion are really "o ple)es of tension, then every affe"tive e)perien"e sho!ld be a !ni3!ely deter ined pro"ess of this sort# then every work of art, being an i age of s!"h a "o ple), sho!ld e)press a parti"!lar feeling !na big!o!sly# instead of being the +!n"ons! ated 8P4 0D4 /09 part in -he Power of the Sy bol

sy bol+ post!lated in Philosophy in a New Eey, it ight have, indeed, a single referen"e* I s!spe"t that this is the "ase, and that the different e otional val!es as"ribed to a work of art lie on a ore intelle"t!al plane than its essential i port( for what a work of art sets forth'the "o!rse of sentien"e, feeling, e otion, and the Ban vital itself'has no "o!nterpart in any vo"ab!lary* Its ele ents, therefore, are dis"!rsively known to !s only as they fig!re in typi"al sit!ations and a"tions# we na e the for asso"iated "onditions* 2!t the sa e progress of e)"itation ay o""!r in entirely different "ir"! stan"es, in sit!ations that b!ild !p to disaster and in others that dissolve witho!t pra"ti"al "onse3!en"es* -he sa e feeling ay be an ingredient in sorrow and in the .oys of love* A work of art e)pressing s!"h an a big!o!sly asso"iated affe"t will be "alled +"heerf!l+ by one interpreter and +wistf!l+ or even +sad+ by another* 2!t what it "onveys is really .!st one na eless passage of +felt life,+ knowable thro!gh its in"arnation in the art sy bol even if the beholder has never felt it in his own flesh*

Even the artist need not have experienced in actual life every emotion he can express. It may be through manipulation of his created elements that he discovers new possibilities of feeling, strange moods, perhaps greater concentrations of passion than his own temperament could ever produce, or than his fortunes have yet called forth. ,or, altho!gh a work of
art reveals the "hara"ter of s!b.e"tivity, it is itself ob.e"tive# its p!rpose is to ob.e"tify the life of feeling* As an abstra"ted for it "an be handled 3!ite apart fro its so!r"es and yield dyna i" patterns that s!rprise even the artist* All alien infl!en"es on his work are s!"h "ontrib!tions to his h! an knowledge $I do not say +psy"hologi"al+ V knowledge, be"a!se psy"hology is a s"ien"e, and only dis"!rsive knowl4X edge "an belong to it%* 2y&antine art, Negro art, 5ind! or Chinese or Polynesian art be"o e i portant for o!r own artisti" life .!st in so far as o!r artists grasp the feelings of those e)oti" works*

-hat brings !s to the se"ond a.or 3!estion, whi"h is episte ologi"al( 5ow "an the i port of an art sy bol $i*e* a work of art% be known to anyone b!t its "reator6 2y the ost ele entary intelle"t!al pro"ess'barring fro that re"ognition of things as pra"ti"al entities whi"h "hapter 81 E)pressiveness the +intelle"t!al+ "ategory

/0<

Coleridge "alled +pri ary i agination,+ and whi"h we probably share with the higher ani als'the basi" intelle"t!al a"t of int!ition* -he word +int!ition,+ !sed in the "onte)t of philosophi"al art theory, nat!rally brings to ind two great na es'2ergson and Cro"e* 2!t if one thinks of int!ition in the ways they have ade fa iliar, it so!nds parado)i"al to speak of +intelle"t!al int!ition,+ be"a!se'whatever differen"es their do"trines ay show'one point where they agree is the non4intelle"t!al nat!re of int!ition* Cro"e e)pli"itly "lai s to have +freed int!itive knowledge fro any s!ggestion of intelle"t!alis + #/ 2ergson;s opposition of int!ition, the dire"t revelation of reality, and intelle"t, the falsifi"ation of reality for pra"ti"al p!rposes, is too well known to re3!ire any restate ent here*9 2!t int!ition as 2ergson "on"eived it is so "lose to ysti"al e)perien"e that it really el!des philosophi"al analysis# it is si ply a s!dden ill! ination, infallible knowledge, rare, and in"o ens!rable with the rest of ental life* Cro"e has a ore !sable notion, na ely i ediate awareness, whi"h is always of an individ!al thing, event, i age, feeling'witho!t any .!dg ent as to its etaphysi"al stat!s, i*e* whether it be fa"t or fan"y*< 2!t here the a"t of int!ition is not, as 2ergson wo!ld have it, a blind +taking possession+ or e otional e)perien"e of +reality+# it is, for Cro"e, an a"t of per"eption whereby the "ontent is for ed, whi"h eans, for hi , t!rned into for *F -his is a diffi"!lt "on"ept, tho!gh not witho!t .!stifi"ation# - will not elaborate or "riti"i&e it here, as it wo!ld lead far into his etaphysi"s* It is, I think, essentially the sa e "on"ept as Eant;s of the data of e)perien"e, whi"h are already for ed by the a"tivity of per"eption'already ade per"ept!al, whi"h is the lowest for of being intelligible* Cro"e;s la"k of pre"ision in the !se of s!"h words as +fa"t,+ +a"tivity,+ + atter,+ gives his Aestheti" a ore
GAestheti" as S"ien"e of E)pression and Ceneral Hing!isti", p* <* 9Any reader who is not fa iliar with it Introd!"tion to Betaphysi"s* ay find its "lassi" state ent in 2ergson;s little book,

sAp* "it*, p* 9( +Int!ition is the !ndifferentiated !nity of the per"eption of the real and of the si ple i age of the possible* In o!r int!itions we do not oppose o!rselves as e piri"al beings to e)ternal reality, b!t we si ply ob.e"tify o!r i pressions, whatever they be*+ 5bid*, pp* ><4>F( +In the aestheti" fa"t, e)pressive a"tivity is not added to the fa"t of the i pressions, b!t these latter are for ed and elaborated by it* * * * -he aestheti" fa"t, therefore, is for , and for alone*+

/0F

part hi -he Power of the Sy bol

"rypti" and d!bio!s appearan"e than it need have, at least with respe"t to art theory* S!"h looseness of lang!age does, I think, invite and "over !p so e logi"ally inad issable steps that lead to his etaphysi"s of +the Spirit+# in aestheti"s it prod!"es only one "onf!sion of great "onse3!en"e'the identifi"ation of int!ition and e)pression,0 whi"h finally leads to the do"trine that a work of art is essentially

so ething in the artist;s ind, and that its d!pli"ation in aterial ter s is in"idental* -his !nfort!nate "on"l!sion has been ade3!ately analy&ed and "riti"i&ed by 2ernard 2osan3!et, H* A* Reid, and others#@ it is, indeed, an error Cro"e sho!ld never have fallen into, and wo!ld not, save for one basi" is"on"eption whi"h is "o on to ost theorists who deal with int!ition'the false "on"eption of the relation of int!ition to sy bolis * 7hat Cro"e eans by +intelle"t!al+ is, !pon all internal eviden"e, si ply +dis"!rsive*+ -he +e)pressive a"tivity+ whereby i pressions are +for ed and elaborated+ and ade a enable to int!ition is, I believe, the pro"ess of ele entary sy bol4 aking# for the basi" sy bols of h! an tho!ght are i ages, whi"h + ean+ the past i pressions that begot the and also those f!t!re ones that e)e plify the sa e for * -hat is a very low level of sy boli&ation, yet it is on this level that "hara"teristi"ally h! an entality begins* No h! an i pression is only a signal fro the o!ter world# it always is also an i age in whi"h possible i pressions are for !lated, that is, a sy bol for the "on"eption of s!"h e)perien"e* -he notion of +s!"h+ bespeaks an ele entary abstra"tion, or awareness of for * -hat is, I think, what Cro"e eant by the +int!ition+ whi"h is indisting!ishable fro
+e)pression,+ when he wrote in "on"l!sion of his first "hapter( +Int!itive knowledge is e)pressive knowledge * * * int!ition or representation are disting!ished as form fro what is felt and s!ffered, fro the fl!) or wave of sensation, or fro psy"hi" atter# and this for , this taking possession, is e)pression* -o int!ite is to e)press# and nothing else $nothing ore, b!t nothing less% than to e)press*+D

,or !lation, representation, abstra"tion( these are the "hara"teristi"

"hapter 81 E)pressiveness

/,,

f!n"tions of sy bols* As s!"h they have been st!died, however, ainly in "onne"tion with dis"!rsive sy bols# and that is why, as Cro"e said, +-here e)ists a very an"ient s"ien"e of intelle"t!al knowledge, ad itted by all witho!t dis"!ssion, na ely, Hogi"# b!t a s"ien"e of int!itive knowledge is ti idly and with diffi"!lty asserted by b!t a few*+>1 As long as int!ition is treated apart fro any ob.e"tive "orrelate, neither its varieties nor its relations to reason, i agination, or any other non4ani alian ental trait "an be st!died* Hogi"ians ay look to the "o ple) and often el!sive f!n"tions of lang!age $either +nat!ral+ lang!age or +artifi"ial,+ i*e* te"hni"al% to re"ord their "ognitive e)perien"es'"on"eption, "oordination of "on"epts, inferen"e, .!dg ent' and find so e pattern of intelle"t!al a"tivity refle"ted in the patterned dis"o!rse that ediates it* 2!t by "onte plating int!itions as dire"t e)perien"es, not ediated, not "orrelated to anything p!bli", one "annot re"ord or syste ati&e the , let alone "onstr!"t a +s"ien"e+ of int!itive knowledge, whi"h will be +the tr!e analog!e of logi"*+>> -he pro"ess of for !lation, as Cro"e presents it, is trans"endental( an int!ition'a p!rely s!b.e"tive a"t'takes pla"e spontaneo!sly, and witho!t any edi! , in a ind* -here are no different kinds of int!ition* Conse3!ently'sin"e int!ition is presently e3!ated to e)pression'there "annot be different kinds of

e)pression, tho!gh there are different "ontents* -his has a far4rea"hing i pli"ation for art theory, na ely that there are no varieties of art, no odes, no styles'no dif4 feren"es between !si" and painting and poetry and dan"e, b!t only int!itive knowledge of so e !ni3!e e)perien"e*>8 7hen Cro"e says( +Every tr!e int!ition or representation is also e)pression+ he really points the way to a possible st!dy of int!ition# for by e)pression he eans what I have "alled +logi"al e)pression,+ no atter how !"h he ight protest the word +logi"al*+ 5e does not ean e otional sy pto s, b!t for !lation* -here is, I think, no for !lation witho!t sy boli" pro.e"tion# what his +s"ien"e+ of non4intelle"t!al knowledge awaited was a re"ognition of non4dis"!rsive sy boli&ation* 5e hi self observed that +as a general r!le, a too restri"ted eaning is given to the word e)pression* It is generally restri"ted to what are "alled verbal e)pressions alone* 2!t there e)ist also non4verbal e)pressions, s!"h as those of line, "olo!r and so!nd, and to all of these !st be e)tended o!r >1Ibid*, p* i* /0@ ))Ibid*, p* >9* >8Ibid*, Chap, iv, passi *

part in -he Power of the Sy bol

affir ation* * * * 2!t be it pi"torial, or verbal, or !si"al, *** to no int!ition "an e)pression in one of its for s be wanting# it is, in fa"t, an inseparable part of int!ition*+>/ It was Cassirer who f!rnished the propaede!ti" to a st!dy of int!ition, in his great Philosophie der symbolischen Formen# and in st!dying the f!n"tions of sy bols of vario!s sorts, on vario!s levels, one finds that they negotiate not only one kind of int!ition, the envisage ent of e)perien"es as individ!al, intelligible for s, this thing, this event, et"* $whi"h answers to Cro"e;s notion%, b!t also other kinds* All "ognition of for is int!itive# all relatedness'distin"tness, "ongr!en"e, "orresponden"e of for s, "ontrast, and synthesis in a total Cestalt'"an be known only by dire"t insight, whi"h is int!ition* And not only for , b!t for al signifi"an"e, or i port, is seen int!itively $wherefore it is so eti es said to be +felt+%, or not at all# that is the basi" sy boli" val!e whi"h probably pre"edes and prepares verbal eaning*>9 -he "o prehension of for itself, thro!gh its e)e plifi"ation in for ed per"eptions or +int!itions,+ is spontaneo!s and nat!ral abstra"tion# b!t the re"ognition of a etaphori"al val!e of so e int!itions, whi"h springs fro the per"eption of their for s, is spontaneo!s and nat!ral interpretation* 2oth abstra"tion and interpretation are int!itive, and ay deal with non4dis"!rsive for s* -hey lie at the base of all h! an entality, and are the roots fro whi"h both lang!age and art take rise*>< Philosophers who re"ogni&e the int!itive "hara"ter of artisti" appre"iation see to have, 3!ite generally, a strong pre.!di"e against s"ientifi" "on"eption and logi"al de onstrations* -hey see to find it ne"essary to depre"ate logi" in order to !phold the val!e and dignity of int!ition, and !s!ally ake a great iss!e of the opposition between the two + ethods of knowing*+ 2!t there is, in tr!th, no s!"h opposition'if only be"a!se int!ition is not a + ethod+ at all, b!t an event* It is, oreover, the be4 ginning and end of logi"# all dis"!rsive reasoning wo!ld be fr!strated
l&Ibid*, p* @* -his passage bespeaks the i possibility of dispensing with kinds, or different for s, of e)pression $int!ition%*

>9A f!ller dis"!ssion of the +sense of i port+ and the nat!re of lang!age New Eey, "hap, v, passi *

ay be fo!nd in

><-he d!al nat!re of lang!age, as both a re"ord of ythi" "on"eption and the so!r"e of generali&ation and s"ientifi" "on"eption, is treated at length in Cassirer;s Philosophie der sy bolis"hen ,or en, and briefly in several essays, espe"ially Hang!age and Byth*

/@1

part in -he Power of the Sy bol

"onveyed by e3!ivalent sy bols, as words ay be denned or translated, there is no way of f!rther identifying the i port of a work* -he only way to ake the feeling4 "ontent of a design, a elody, a poe , or any other art sy bol p!bli", is to present the e)pressive for so abstra"tly and for"ibly that anyone with nor al sensitivity for the art in 3!estion will see this for and its +e otive 3!ality+ $"f* Chap* 8, espe"ially pp* 8148>( 2aens"h on e otion as a 3!ality in a work of art%* A sy bol that "annot be separated fro its sense "annot really be said to refer to so ething o!tside itself* +Refer+ is not the right word for its "hara"teristi" f!n"tion* And where the sy bol does not have an a""epted referen"e, the !se of it is not properly +"o !ni"ation*+ Jet its f!n"tion is e)pression, in the logi"al, not the biologi"al, sense $weeping, raging, tail4wagging%# and in good art the e)pression is tr!e, in bad art false, and in poor art !ns!""essf!l* 7here no intent or i p!lse to e)press anything enters in at all, the prod!"t'even if it be a h! an fig!re, like a tailor;s d! y or a doll'is not art* A tailor;s d! y "o!ld be art, and dolls "an be and so eti es are* An the s!b.e"t of artisti" tr!th and falsity I find yself in f!ll agree ent with at least one e inent aestheti"ian, R* C* Collingwood* -his is all the ore gratifying to e, and I hope to hi , too, as I did not read his Prin"iples of Art !ntil y own ideas were "o pletely for ed, so the si ilarity of o!r "on"l!sions is a !t!al "orroboration* 7ith his epis4te ology I "annot 3!ite agree# the ingredient of self4"ons"io!sness, and indeed the stri"t li itation of artisti" e)pression to a"t!al e)perien"e, see to e is"on"eived# b!t ore of that later, with the rest of o!r differen"es* -he present proble is tr!th* Art is envisage ent of feeling, whi"h involves its for !lation and e)pression in what I "all a sy bol and Br* Collingwood "alls +lang!age*+ $It is, of "o!rse, !nfort!nate that words are so differently !sed by different writers'he !ses +sy bol+ only to denote what se anti"ists today "all +artifi"ial lang!age,+ s!"h as athe ati"al sy bolis or the "onstr!"ted lang!ages whi"h Carnap analy&es'b!t taking his words as he evidently eans the , his state ents abo!t e)pression and envisage ent ring tr!e*% -his envisage ent, however, ay be interfered with by e otions whi"h are not for ed and re"ogni&ed, b!t affe"t the i agination of other s!b.e"tive e)perien"e* Art whi"h is th!s distorted at its very "hapter 81 e)pressiveness /@>

so!r"e by la"k of "andor is bad art, and it is bad be"a!se it is not tr!e to what a "andid envisage ent wo!ld have been* Candor is the standard( +seeing straight,+ the verna"!lar "alls it* As Br* Collingwood says, where envisage ent is false one "annot really speak of either error or lie, be"a!se error arises only on the higher level of +intelle"t+ $dis"!rsive thinking%, and lying pres!pposes ;;knowing better+# b!t la"k of

"andid vision takes effe"t on the deep level of i agination* -his kind of falseness he "alls, therefore, +"orr!ption of "ons"io!sness*+>0 2ad art is "orr!pt art* It is false in the ost vi"io!s way, be"a!se this falseness "annot be s!bse3!ently helped, as a lie ay be e)posed and retra"ted, and error ay be fo!nd and "orre"ted* Corr!pt art "an only be rep!diated and destroyed* ! bad work of art, he says, is an activity in which the agent tries to express a given emotion, but fails. This is the difference between bad art and art falsely so called. ... In art falsely so called there is no failure to express, because there is no attempt at expression; there is only an attempt "whether successful or not# to do something else. $% -o these distin"tions between art and non4art on the one hand, good and bad art on the other, I wo!ld add a f!rther, tho!gh less f!nda ental one within the sphere of essentially good art, na ely free art and ha pered or poor art* -his arises on a level of i aginative a"tivity "orresponding to the +intelle"t!al+ level of entality, na ely the level of art work* Br* Collingwood does not ad it the artist;s "raft as s!"h a higher develop ent, be"a!se he aintains that art "annot be "raft# art has no te"hni3!e*>D At this point I "annot bear hi "o pany* A!r differen"e ay be +verbal,+ b!t even as s!"h it is i portant, be"a!se the way one !ses words is not arbitrary# it reveals one;s basi" "on"eptions# so the "riti"is of his ter inology whi"h follows is really a "riti"is of what I "onsider his inade3!ate notions* -hese are, in "hief, his "on"epts of work, of >0See -he Prin"iples of Art, p* 8>D* >@Ibid*, p* 8@8* -he entire se"tion $"hap, )ii, +Art as Hang!age,+ K/, +Cood Art and 2ad Art+% is relevant here, b!t of "o!rse too long to 3!ote# the reader, therefore, is !rgently advised to read it at its so!r"e'and, indeed, to read the entire book* >1;Ibid*, p* in( +E)pression is an a"tivity of whi"h there "an be no te"hni3!e*+ eans and ends, the art

/@8

part in -he Power of the Sy bol

edi! , and the relations of vario!s h! an a"tivities to ea"h other* In "riti"is , he has a tenden"y to what one ight "all +si ple re.e"tion+( e)a ining the alleged relationship of two ter s s!"h as, for instan"e, representation and artisti" e)pression, finding that the proposed relation does not hold, and "onse3!ently asserting that the ter s have no relation whatever to one another*81 -his tenden"y prevents hi fro s!b.e"ting the pro"ess of artisti" "reation to the detailed and fr!itf!l sort of st!dy whi"h he gave to the pro"ess of i aginative envisage ent, and leads hi finally to regard the artist;s i agination of feeling $whi"h is all he has really analy&ed% as the work of art itself* In one pla"e he writes that +a work of art ay be "o pletely "reated when it has been "reated as a thing whose only pla"e is in the artist;s ind+ $p* >/1%, and shortly after( +-he !si", the work of art, is not the "olle"tion of noises, it is the t!ne in the "o poser;s head*+ $P* >/D*% Si ilar state ents are s"attered thro!gho!t 2ook I* 5ere is the Cro"ean identifi"ation of e)pression and int!ition $tho!gh Br* Collingwood !ses +knowledge+'+int!ition+ does not even appear in his inde)%, and their f!rther identifi"ation with art# the stat!e "o pletely seen in i agination, the !npainted pi"t!re*

-he ost d!bio!s of all his tenets, however, is that an artist "annot know what sort of work'even in the broadest lines, e*g* whether a "o edy or a tragedy'he is abo!t to "reate# be"a!se +If the differen"e between tragedy and "o edy is a differen"e between the e otions they e)press, it is not a differen"e that "an be present to the artist;s ind when he is beginning his work# if it were, he wo!ld know what e otion he was going to e)press before he had e)pressed it* No artist, therefore, * * * "an set o!t to write a "o edy, a tragedy, an elegy, or the like* So far as he is an artist proper, he is .!st as likely to write any one of these as any other* * * *+8>
81,or instan"e( +Le"iding what psy"hologi"al rea"tion a work of art prod!"es $for e)a ple, asking yo!rself how a "ertain poe ; akes yo! feel;% has nothing whatever to do with de"iding whether it is a real work of art or not*+ $P* /8*% -here is a sense in whi"h feeling is the s!rest g!ide to good art# the feeling of e)"ite ent abo!t the work whi"h bespeaks its i portan"e as art, not as anything else* Ar again( +-he origin of perspe"tive * * * was "onne"ted with the !se of painting as an ad.!n"t to ar"hite"t!re* * * * ,or ovable pi"t!res, perspe"tive is ere pedantry*+ $Pp* 8</ ff*% Its p!rpose in easel pi"t!res is, indeed, not to bring o!t a wall4plane# b!t ay one therefore say so glibly that it has no other p!rpose6 8>Ibid*, p* >>F* -he "onte)t of this passage is the ost radi"al treat ent I have

In 2ook III, Br* Collingwood see s to take any of his 3!i)oti" state ents ba"k* 5e grants that artists paint in order to for !late their vision and e)press their feelings, and that painting is part of "reative seeing, a different thing fro +looking at the s!b.e"t witho!t painting it+ $p* /1@%# and also that !si"ians +"o pose for perfor an"e,+ and that the perfor ers +are not only per itted b!t re3!ired to fill in the details+ $pp* /814/8>%* 7ith the best will in the world to follow his transitions, it is not always possible to re"on"ile s!"h ad issions with what went before# how "an the perfor ers, the a!dien"e, and even other artists +"ollaborate+ on a pie"e that is +a t!ne in the "o poser;s head+ or any other $perhaps plasti"% work +"o pletely "reated *** in the artist;s ind+6 Perhaps the best way to over"o e the diffi"!lties of his "riti"al portion $2ook I% is to ask why he is an)io!s to deny "rafts anship any role in art and "onse3!ently to re.e"t the "on"ept of te"hni3!e, and why he has to depre"ate the ideal of literal e)pression in s"ien"e and philosophy and treat lang!age as essentially e)pression of feeling with a "on"ept!al "ontent only in"identally "onveyed* So ething is issing in the episte ologi"al str!"t!re* -he badness of his arg! ents against the +theory of te"hni3!e+ and the "on"eption of +art as "raft,+ and against all and s!ndry theories of ling!isti" for s and literal eaning, bespeaks a fear of !na""eptable "on"l!sions( and that is nothing less than a la"k of philosophi"al "andor'+"orr!ption of "ons"io!sness+'a failing as nat!ral and "o on in philosophy as in art* 5e hi self has stated this fa"t( +Corr!ption of "ons"io!sness is not a re"ondite sin whi"h over4 "o es only an !nfort!nate or a""!rsed few# it is a "onstant e)perien"e in the life of any artist, and his life is a "onstant and* on the whole, a s!""essf!l warfare against it* * * *+ +A tr!thf!l "ons"io!sness gives intelle"t a fir fo!ndation on whi"h to b!ild# a "orr!pt "ons"io!sness for"es intelle"t to b!ild on 3!i"ksand*+88 Het !s find the eviden"es of sin* -hey are, in 2ook I, the distortions in whi"h he presents the "on"epts he wishes to re.e"t, for instan"e the red!"tion of all +"raft+ to

+ways of bringing h! an beings into "ertain sophisti"al and ade only in order

ental "onditions,+ whi"h is obvio!sly

fo!nd of art as +a fine fren&y+ witho!t plan or "onte)t* 88Ibid*, p* 8@9* / @9 part in -he Poiver of the Sy bol

to identify any ad ission of "raft in art with a "on"eption of art as "raft, and the latter, in t!rn, with art as e otional sti !l!s'whi"h is the idea he really, and properly, sets o!t to "o bat* So ething has f!sed all these "on"epts into one vag!e ass* Se"ondly( on page >1@ he akes the "ategori"al state ent, +-he ele ent whi"h the te"hni"al theory "alls the end $i*e* the ai of art% is denned by it as the aro!sing of e otion*+ 2!t he has 3!oted no defender of so ething that "o!ld be "alled +the te"hni"al theory+ to the effe"t that the p!rpose of te"hni3!e is to aro!se e otion, let alone proven that all its adherents wo!ld agree to this* -he tenets of +the te"hni"al theory+ are, in fa"t, what he hi self has "hosen to l! p !nder that na e# and again, it is art as sti !lation of feeling that he really wants to get rid of, and +te"hni3!e+ is vag!ely asso"iated with that false theory* -he weakness of s!"h !ntr!e arg! ents shows !p "learly in the fa"t that the definitions of ter s whi"h are said not to belong to art, b!t to other spheres, are so rigid and barren that they wo!ld be no ore !sable in their alleged proper pla"es than in art* 5is definition of +sy bol,+ for instan"e, is so narrow that it is synony o!s with +artifi"ial lang!age+# b!t sin"e ling!isti"s and logi" are said to rest !pon the !se of sy bols, the narrow definition serves to ake those dis"iplines see like trivial artifi"es* -hat is philosophi"al alpra"ti"e* It is the sa e sin that posi4tivists "o it when they l! p all proble s of art, of whi"h they know nothing, !nder +e otional rea"tion,+ whi"h they then relegate to a +s"ien"e of psy"hology+ of whi"h they know nothing either* ,inally, Br* Collingwood asserts that lang!age is not the se anti" str!"t!re it is s!pposed to be, b!t has neither vo"ab!lary nor synta)# it is p!re e)pression, "reated by +"ons"io!sness+# it is art, and has no te"hni3!e, no +!se+ $"orre"t or in"orre"t%, and no sy boli" f!n"tion4it is e)pression of feeling, like dan"e, painting, or !si"* All spee"h is poetry* Cra ar and synta) and even the re"ognition of words are p!rely arbitrary inventions for "!tting it !p $so ewhat, we ay ass! e, like the +verses+ into whi"h ediaeval s"holars divided the 5oly S"ript!re for 3!i"k identifi"ation of any passage%* 2!t here, where a strong arg! ent is ost needed to establish so radi"al a do"trine, his powers of de onstration break down altogether* 5e is "ontent to show that lang!age always has so ething to do with feeling, that it "an e)ist only "hapter >1 E)pressiveness /@<

where i agination has already grasped and for ed +psy"hi"al feeling,+ and as this i agination is the root of art, all lang!age is art and all art is lang!age# whi"h he proves by slandering gra arians $+A gra arian is not a kind of s"ientist *** he is a kind of b!t"her+8/% and ins!lting I* A* Ri"hards $referring to his +fastidio!s Ca bridge o!th,+ et"*%*89 S!"h writing is !nworthy of a an who has tr!e things to say* 5ere he is on intelle"t!al 3!i"ksand# here is the passional re.e"tion of so e "on"ept that is not to be entertained, the fear of so e 2la"k 2east of aestheti"s*

-he 2la"k 2east of whi"h ost aestheti"ians who hold a theory of art as e)pression stand in fear, is the "on"ept of the Art Sy bol* -he !navowed fa"t whi"h ha!nts the is the fa"t that an e)pressive for is, after all, a sy boli" for * As soon as one looks this fa"t in the fa"e, all the a.or parado)es and ano alies disappear'+signifi"ant for + that is not signifi"ant of anything,8< poetry and !si" of whi"h +we ay say, if we like, that both are e)pressive,+ b!t sho!ld avoid tro!ble +by insisting that they ;e)press; nothing, nothing at all,+8F Cro"e;s theory of artisti" e)pression re3!iring no edi! , and Collingwood;s si ilar "on"ept of the +e)pressive a"t,+ whi"h o""!rs only in the artist;s head, as the work of art itself* So long as one tries to evade the sy boli" for whi"h ediates the +e)pression of the Idea,+ one "annot st!dy the pro"ess of that e)pression, nor point o!t pre"isely how it differs fro other a"tivities* 2!t as soon as one ad its that +e)pressive for + is a spe"ial kind of sy boli" for , interesting proble s present the selves for sol!tion, and so e ever4threatening dangers of esallian"e between aestheti"s and ethi"s or s"ien"e are safely obviated* -here is no danger of e bra"ing a +vi"io!s intelle"t!alis + on"e the differen"e between an art sy bol and a s"ientifi" sy bol'or better, s"ientifi" sy bolis 'is !nderstood( they are as different as art is fro s"ien"e( it is, indeed, the radi"al dif4 feren"e between their respe"tive sy boli" for s that akes art and dis"o!rse $logi", s"ien"e, atter of fa"t% f!nda entally different real s, and re oves the hope $or fear, as the "ase ay be% of so e philosophers
8SIbid*, p* 8<0* 8iIbid*, p* 8F9* 8<-he referen"e is, of "o!rse, to Clive 2ell;s phrase* 8F1* E* 2ows a, +-he E)pression -heory of Art,+ in Ba) 2la"k;s anthology, Philosophi"al Analysis* See p* D0*

C"

/@F part in -he Power of the Sy bol that in an +age of s"ien"e+ art will aspire and finally grad!ate to the dignity of s"ientifi" tho!ght*80 -he first "r!"ial proble that finds sol!tion is, how a work of art ay be at on"e a p!rely i aginative "reation, intrinsi"ally different fro an artifa"t'not, indeed, properly a physi"al +thing+'yet be not only +real,+ b!t ob.e"tive* -he "on"ept of the "reated thing as non4a"t!al, i*e* ill!sory, b!t i aginatively and even sens!o!sly present, f!n"tioning as a sy bol b!t not as a physi"al dat! , not only answers the i ediate 3!estion, b!t answers it in a way whi"h s!ggests the answer to its "orol4 lary, the proble of te"hni3!e* -o assert that art has no te"hni3!e, no inti ate relation to "raft is, after all, a to!r de for"e# and in little passages, here and there, the a!thor of that do"trine tries to soften it by saying that altho!gh +the painted pi"t!re is not the work of art in the proper sense of that phrase,+ yet +its prod!"tion is so ehow ne"essarily "onne"ted with the aestheti" a"tivity, that is, with the "reation of the i aginative e)perien"e whi"h is the work of art*+8@ 5e proposes to show the ne"essity of the "onne"tion# b!t the de onstration is always pre"ario!s and evasive*

If, however, we regard the pi"t!re as the art sy bol whi"h e)presses the i aginative e)perien"e, i*e* the artist;s envisage ent of feeling, then the painted pi"t!re is the work of art +in the proper sense of that phrase,+
80Santayana, in Reason in Art, p* in, speaks of +that half4 ythi"al world thro!gh whi"h poets, for want of a rational ed!"ation, have hitherto wandered,+ and hopes for a rappro"he ent between poetry and s"ien"e( +A rational poet;s vision wo!ld have the sa e oral f!n"tions whi"h yth was asked to f!lfil, and f!lfilled so trea"hero!sly# it wo!ld e ploy the sa e ideal fa"!lties whi"h yth e)pressed in a "onf!sed and hasty fashion* Bore detail wo!ld have been added, and ore variety in interpretation* * * * S!"h a poetry wo!ld be ore deeply rooted in h! an e)perien"e than any "as!al fan"y, and therefore ore appealing to the heart*+ +If knowledge were general and ade3!ate the fine arts wo!ld a""ordingly be bro!ght aro!nd to e)pressing reality* * * * -h!s there wo!ld be no separation of !sef!l fro fine art*+ MIbid*, p* 8>9*% In E!gene Veron;s H;Estheti3!e the sa e hope is e)pressed that art will abandon ythi"al i agination and be"o e s"ientifi"* Strindberg e)pe"ted the sa e develop ent, b!t feared that p!bli" enlighten ent wo!ld be the end of dra a, whi"h de ands an easily del!ded a!dien"e $Prefa"e to Biss =!lia%* -he e)tre e state ent of the servile attit!de a whole generation of artists and "riti"s took toward s"ien"e ay be fo!nd in a little book p!blished in >D>/ by two a!thors who were ranked, at that ti e, with the avant4garde( -he Bodern Evol!tion of Plasti" E)pression, by B* Le Nayas and P* 2* 5aviland* 5ere we

"hapter 81 E)pressiveness

/@0

and we are relieved of the proble why the +proper+ sense is one that has never been !sed# for even good artists, and s!"h as think abo!t art theory, say of Heonardo;s +Hast S!pper+ that it is a work of art, and not of the selves that they are +having+ one when they see or think of the pi"t!re* -he pi"t!re is, indeed, not the paint on the wall, b!t the ill!sion whi"h Heonardo "reated by eans of paint on da p plaster* -he paint, !nhappily, has largely disappeared# b!t there is eno!gh left to s!stain the ill!sion, so the pi"t!re is still there* If ti e obliterates that last faint pig entation, the work of art will have disappeared, no atter how well anyone ay know and re e ber its vital i port'the har onies of feeling it revealed* -he artist;s work is the aking of the e otive sy bol# this aking involves varying degrees of "rafts anship, or te"hni3!e* 2eyond the r!di ents whi"h everyone learns 'how to !se a pen"il at all, how to !se lang!age at all, how to whittle a sti"k, "hip a stone, sing a t!ne'he learns his "raft as he needs it for his p!rpose, whi"h is to "reate a virt!al ob.e"t that shall be an e)pressive for * 2!t "raft, or te"hni3!e, is not the e"hani"al, ro!tine, di"tated pro"ed!re that Br* Collingwood des"ribes# every artist invents his te"hni3!e, and develops his i agination as he does so* -hat is why painting and seeing are all of a pie"e when a person is "reating a pi"t!re#8D hearing and "o posing, or at a later stage of !si"al work, hearing and playing or singing, are indivisible a"ts* 2e"a!se every artist !st aster his "raft in his own way, for his own p!rposes of sy boli&ing ideas of s!b.e"tive reality, there ay be poor art, whi"h is not "orr!pt, b!t fails to e)press what he knew in too brief an int!ition* It is hard to hold an

envisage ent witho!t a ore or less per anent sy bol# and to be "onfronted with a wrong sy bol "an !ndo an inward vision* An !nfa iliar tool, an inade3!ate !si"al instr! ent, b!t also a physi"ally !n"ontrollable hand ay "ontradi"t i agination, and, in the earliest o ents of a dawning idea, ay r!th4find( +Art is being largely infl!en"ed and possibly absorbed by s"ien"e inas !"h as it e)presses a s"ientifi" pheno enon whi"h "an only be e)pressed thro!gh for * *** It is trying to ake for a vehi"le for psy"hology and etaphysi"s*+ $P* >D*% 2!t in an earlier passage they ad itted, rather sadly( +7e do not think that art has yet rea"hed a stage where it "an be "onsidered as a p!re s"ientifi" e)pression of an* * * *+ $P* >/*% 8@Collingwood, op* "it*, p* /1<* 8DIbid*, p* /1/* /@@ part in -he Power of the Sy bol

lessly p!t it o!t* -he res!lt is a poor and helpless prod!"t, sin"ere eno!gh, b!t "onf!sed and fr!strated by re"al"itran"e of the edi! or sheer la"k of te"hni"al freedo * I "an see no point in defining +te"hni3!e+ so it eans + an!fa"t!re,+ e)"ept as part of the "a paign against the treat ent of art works as +goods+ and of people who val!e the as +"ons! ers*+ -his "a paign is right4 inded and .!stified eno!gh# b!t it need not sweep away all relations of art to the a"tivities whi"h nor ally feed it'the "rafts, and the world4wide interest in sheer entertain ent* Br* Collingwood, like 2rander Batthews, speaks only of +a !se ent,+ whi"h has an overtone of self4ind!lgen"e, triviality, and "heapness, and is easily relegated to the "ategory of non4art#O1 b!t entertain ent is another thing* Bo&art;s Barriage of ,igaro, Shakespeare;s -e pest, =ane A!sten;s Pride and Pre.!di"e are e)"ellent entertain ent# they are also very good art* -o ad it the possible "oin"iden"e of artisanship or entertain ent with artisti" e)pression is not eno!gh #/> they stand, evidently, in so e inti ate relation* And the "onne"tion is really obvio!s( the "rafts $in"l!ding the literary and theatri"al "rafts% f!rnish the aterials and te"hni3!es of artisti" "reation* A person who is by

intuition an artist cannot shape a pot, or make up a song for a festive occasion, without feeling the artistic possibilities of the project* If the pot
is !gly or the song banal, that is not be"a!se an artist ade the pot for the di e store, or the song for + agi"+ p!rposes# it is be"a!se the aker was not an artist b!t a v!lgar person, who tho!ght the !gly pot +pretty+ or the banal song +grand,+ or perhaps did not think of per"ept!al val!es at all, so long as his pot held twelve o!n"es, or his song was a""epted by the progra "o ittee* -he; "rafts, in short, provide opport!nities to ake works of art# they have a"t!ally been the s"hool of feeling $feeling be"o es "lear and "ons"io!s only thro!gh its sy bols%, as they were the in"entives to arti"!lation and the first for !lators of abstra"tive vision* 7hether art is pra"ti"ed in the servi"e of religion or of entertain ent, or in the ho!se4
/1Batthews !sed the ter for the opposite p!rpose'to show that all art, +fro 2!ffalo 2ill;s 7ild 7est to the ;Aedip!s; of Sopho"les,+ was really .!st a !se ent, hen"e a "o odity, and therefore as respe"table as golf and as "lose to the hearts of A eri"ans as pop"orn and i"e "rea * See A 2ook Abo!t the -heater, Chap i* slCollingwood, op* "it*, p* 800*

bol +P!gh, Ha"k !re, Gs as paign *Q all * and like ertone ed to Bo&art;s and t* -o with ar4inti ate g the 3!es of hape a artisti" that is ong for a v!lgar rand,+ his pot "o ittee* /f art# (ar and arti"!4art is ho!se4 , +fro a !se4to the -heater,

"hapter 81 E)pressiveness

/@D

hold by wo en potters and weavers, or passionately in forlorn atti"s with leaky skylights, akes no differen"es to its own ai s, its p!rity, or its dignity and i portan"e* Ane f!rther proble of artisti" "reation, whi"h Br* Collingwood disposed of in a way that is either Pi"kwi"kian or very d!bio!s, is the proble of what he "alls +kinds+ of work'tragedy, "o edy, elegy, sonnet 'and in other arts, still life or lands"ape, song or string 3!artet, et"* Cro"e also "lai s that s!"h +kinds+ of work do not e)ist# b!t what his protest "o es to is that there are no separate standards whereby to .!dge different +kinds+ of painting, poetry and so forth, and any "lassifi"ation is, "onse3!ently, philosophi"ally trivial*/8 -hat is tr!e# b!t the f!tility of labeling works a""ording to their the es, aterials, si&e, or what not, is a different atter altogether fro the s!pposed inability of the artist to know, at the o!tset, what will be the s"ope and general "hara"ter of his work*// In "reating an e otive sy bol, or work of art, the "reator does arti"!late a vital i port whi"h he "o!ld not i agine apart fro its e)pression, and "onse3!ently "annot know before he e)presses it* 2!t the a"t of "on"eption whi"h sets his work going, whether it "o es s!ddenly like an inspiration or only after !"h .oyless and labored f!ddling, is the envisage ent of the +"o anding for ,+ the f!nda ental feeling to be e)plored and e)pressed* -his is +the work of art in the artist;s head*+ As soon as he "on"eives this atri) of the work4to4be, he knows what !st be its general str!"t!re, its proportions, its degree of elaboration# a tragedy begins with an ad! bration of its parti"!lar +tragi" rhyth ,+ whi"h deter ines its weightiness, its di"tion, its whole e"ono y# a lyri" springs fro one total lyri" feeling, it is not a series of little feeling4 gli pses that ay string o!t into a play or a novel for all the artist knows* A tr!e artist is, indeed, not likely to set o!t with the resolve( +I want to write a lyri",+ b!t rather with the dis"overy( +I have an idea for a lyri"*+ Jet even s!"h alleged arks of the +tr!e artist+ !st be taken with a grain of salt* A "o petent painter, a""epting a "o ission for a portrait, a !ral, or any other +kind+ of work, si ply tr!sts that, "onte plating the powers of the edi! , he will have a s!dden insight /8Aestheti", p* /<* //S!pra*, Chap* @, passi *

bol

+P!gh, Ha"k !re, Gs as paign *Q all * and like ertone ed to Bo&art;s and t* -o with ar4inti ate g the 3!es of hape a artisti" that is ong for a v!lgar rand,+ his pot "o ittee* /f art# (ar and arti"!4art is ho!se4 , +fro a !se4to the -heater, /@D "hapter 81 E)pressiveness

hold by wo en potters and weavers, or passionately in forlorn atti"s with leaky skylights, akes no differen"es to its own ai s, its p!rity, or its dignity and i portan"e* Ane f!rther proble of artisti" "reation, whi"h Br* Collingwood disposed of in a way that is either Pi"kwi"kian or very d!bio!s, is the proble of what he "alls +kinds+ of work'tragedy, "o edy, elegy, sonnet 'and in other arts, still life or lands"ape, song or string 3!artet, et"* Cro"e also "lai s that s!"h +kinds+ of work do not e)ist# b!t what his protest "o es to is that there are no separate standards whereby to .!dge different +kinds+ of painting, poetry and so forth, and any "lassifi"ation is, "onse3!ently, philosophi"ally trivial*/8 -hat is tr!e# b!t the f!tility of labeling works a""ording to their the es, aterials, si&e, or what not, is a different atter altogether fro the s!pposed inability of the artist to know, at the o!tset, what will be the s"ope and general "hara"ter of his work*// In "reating an e otive sy bol, or work of art, the "reator does arti"!late a vital i port whi"h he "o!ld not i agine apart fro its e)pression, and "onse3!ently "annot know before he e)presses it* 2!t the a"t of "on"eption whi"h sets his work going, whether it "o es s!ddenly like an inspiration or only after !"h .oyless and labored f!ddling, is the envisage ent of the +"o anding for ,+ the f!nda ental feeling to be e)plored and e)pressed* -his is +the work of art in the artist;s head*+ As soon as he "on"eives this atri) of the work4to4be, he knows what !st be its general str!"t!re, its proportions, its degree of elaboration# a tragedy begins with an ad! bration of its parti"!lar +tragi" rhyth ,+ whi"h deter ines its weightiness, its di"tion, its whole e"ono y# a lyri" springs fro one total lyri" feeling, it is not a series of little feeling4 gli pses that ay string o!t into a play or a novel for all the artist knows* A tr!e artist is, indeed, not likely to set o!t with the resolve( +I want to write a lyri",+ b!t rather with the dis"overy( +I have an idea for a lyri"*+ Jet even s!"h alleged arks of the +tr!e artist+ !st be taken with a grain of salt* A "o petent painter, a""epting a "o ission for a portrait, a !ral, or any other +kind+ of work, si ply tr!sts that, "onte plating the powers of the edi! , he will have a s!dden insight /8Aestheti", p* /<* //S!pra*, Chap* @, passi *

politi"al events I;d get into# b!t fro tne very !egi !!g w RRv S' "ons"io!sness I knew what anything that "o!ld happen to e wo!ld have to be like*+ Anything an artist "an envisage is +like+ his own s!b.e"tivity, or is at least "onne"ted with his ways of feeling* S!"h "onne"tions nor ally o""!r for hi thro!gh his widening knowledge of other people;s art# that is, by sy boli" revelation* -he appre"iation of new art is a develop ent of one;s own e otive possibilities# and that, of "o!rse, is an e)pansion of native powers, not an intelle"t!al a""eptan"e of novelty

in a tolerant spirit* -oleration is another atter, and is in order pre"isely where we do not !nderstand other people;s e)pressions, be"a!se they are new, e)oti", or very individ!al* An artist;s "atholi"ity grows with his growing artisti" tho!ght, his freedo in varying, b!ilding, and developing for s, and the progressive dis"overy of i port thro!gh his own f!nded i agination* Even his own works'whi"h ste fro his inner e)perien"e4 ay, and happily do, o!tgrow the "o pass of his personal life, and show hi , in a !"h greater vision, what anything that "an happen to h! anity !st be like* Enowledge of his own s!b.e"tivity be"o es part of that greater vision, tho!gh it re ains at the "enter* 5is knowledge of life goes as far as his art "an rea"h* So !"h for the artist and his work, the idea and its for , "on"eption and e)pression# b!t the work that leaves its a!thor;s keeping enters, therewith, into other people;s lives, and this "ir"! stan"e raises the f!rther 3!estions( 2y what standards shall they eas!re it6 7hat is it to the 6 7hat is its p!bli" i portan"e6 -hese are the !lti ate 3!estions in a philosophy of art, be"a!se they pres!ppose knowledge of the art sy bol itself'its nat!re, its i port, and its tr!th4val!e* Anly at the end of a syste ati" st!dy, therefore, ay they be profitably raised, in e)pe"tation of so e well4fo!nded answer*