Visual C 2012 How to Program 5th Edition Deitel

Test Bank download

https://testbankdeal.com/product/visual-c-2012-how-to-
program-5th-edition-deitel-test-bank/

Explore and download more test bank or solution manual

at testbankdeal.com
 We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit testbankdeal.com
to discover even more!

Visual C 2012 How to Program 5th Edition Deitel Solutions

Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/visual-c-2012-how-to-program-5th-
edition-deitel-solutions-manual/

Visual C# How to Program 6th Edition Deitel Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/visual-c-how-to-program-6th-edition-
deitel-test-bank/

Visual C How to Program 6th Edition Deitel Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/visual-c-how-to-program-6th-edition-
deitel-test-bank-2/

Fundamentals of Machine Component Design 5th Edition

Juvinall Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/fundamentals-of-machine-component-
design-5th-edition-juvinall-solutions-manual/
Organizational Behavior 14th Edition Robbins Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/organizational-behavior-14th-edition-
robbins-test-bank/

Investments Global Edition 10th Edition Bodie Solutions

Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/investments-global-edition-10th-
edition-bodie-solutions-manual/

American Politics Today Essentials 5th Edition Bianco Test

Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/american-politics-today-
essentials-5th-edition-bianco-test-bank/

Managerial Economics 3rd Edition Froeb Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/managerial-economics-3rd-edition-
froeb-solutions-manual/

Statistics for Economics Accounting and Business Studies

7th Edition Barrow Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/statistics-for-economics-accounting-
and-business-studies-7th-edition-barrow-solutions-manual/
Microwave Circuit Design A Practical Approach Using ADS
1st Edition Yeom Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/microwave-circuit-design-a-practical-
approach-using-ads-1st-edition-yeom-solutions-manual/
Visual C# 2012 How to Program, Fifth Edition

CHAPTER 9—Introduction to LINQ and Generic Collections

Test Item File

9.1 Introduction
1. The international standard for querying relational databases is called:
a) XML
b) SQL
c) HTTP
d) LINQ
Answer: b

2. Unlike arrays, lists do not resize automatically.

Answer: False. Lists resize automatically and arrays must be explicitly resized.

3. Visual C# requires you to write SQL to query data sources.

Answer: False. LINQ can be used to query data sources.

4. LINQ allows you to select from a data source items that meet a set of conditions.
Answer: True.

9.2 Querying an Array Using LINQ

1. In a LINQ query, the where clause specifies .
a) the data source
b) where to put the data
c) the condition(s) for including the item
d) the Location property
d) the data type
Answer: c

2. The range variable is implicitly defined in the _____ clause and used to produce results
in the ______ clause
a) where, put
b) from, put
c) from, select
d) where, select
e) in, foreach
Answer: c

© Copyright 1992-2014 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
3. What method returns the number of items in LINQ query result q?
a) q.Length
b) q.Size
c) q.getUpperBound
d) q.Count
Answer: d

4. The range variable for the LINQ query must be of type IEnumerable.
Answer: False. IEnumerable is an interface for objects that can be iterated
through.

5. The objects returned when using multiple properties in a select clause are objects of
an anonymous type.
Answer: True.

6. If multiple properties are listed in the select clause, the results will be of type
SelectedList.
Answer: False. The query will return the properties in an object of an anonymous
class.

7. A generic method is a shorter way to express overloaded methods that have the same
name and same number of arguments, but process different types of data.
Answer: True.

8. A generic method does not need an object of the class in order to execute.
Answer: False. A static method (discussed in Chapter 10) does not need an object
in order to execute.

9.3 Querying an Array of Employee Objects Using LINQ

1. You can sort a LINQ query’s results only by one property.

Answer: False. You can supply a comma-separated list of properties in the
orderby clause.

2. The ________ extension method is typically used to determine whether a LINQ

query’s results are non-empty.
a) Any
b) First
c) Count
d) None of the above
Answer: a

3. The ________ extension method is returns the number of results in a LINQ query.
a) Any
b) First

© Copyright 1992-2014 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
c) Count
d) None of the above
Answer: c

3. The ________ extension method indicates that only unique values should be included
in a LINQ query’s results.
a) Any
b) Distinct
c) Count
d) None of the above
Answer: b

4. The results of a LINQ query can have only the same type as the data being queried—
for example, a LINQ query on a collection of Employee objects will always have
Employee objects in the results.
Answer: False. A LINQ query’s select clause can be used to create new
anonymous types or new objects of existing types. For example, you could use the
select clause to select only the first name string of each employee, which would
result in a collection strings rather than a collection of Employees.

9.4 Introduction to Collections

1. Collections of type List< T > can hold objects of what type?
a) only other lists
b) only integers
c) objects of any one type
d) None of the above
Answer: c

2. A List< T > is similar to an array, but can also _________.

a) dynamically resize
b) add items anywhere in the List< T >
c) contain objects of any one type
d) Both a and b
Answer: d

3. The .NET collection classes provide flexible, efficient alternatives to arrays.

Answer: True.

4. A List< T > can automatically resize itself to accommodate additional elements.

Answer: True.

5. Elements can be added at any location within an array after it’s created.

© Copyright 1992-2014 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Answer: False. You cannot add elements to an array once it’s created, you can only
change the value of an element. The List< T > collection allows elements to be
added at any location within the List< T >.

6. The Capacity property indicates the number of elements stored in the List< T >.
Answer: False. The Capacity property indicates the number of elements that can
be stored in the List< T > without resizing.

9.5 Querying a Generic Collection Using LINQ

1.Which of the following statements about LINQ is false?
a) A new LINQ query must be used when changes are made to the data source.
b) A LINQ query does not need to have a let clause
c) A LINQ query returns an IEnumerable object
d) LINQ stands for Language Integrated Query.
Answer: a

2. A let clause is used to create _______.

a) a method within a LINQ query
b) a subquery
c) a new range variable
d) None of the above
Answer: c

3. LINQ is used to query collections in the same way it’s used to query arrays.
Answer: True.

4. A LINQ query is executed when it’s created.

Answer: False. A LINQ query is not executed until its results are accessed.

© Copyright 1992-2014 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Other documents randomly have
different content
and variety of its nuances, the entire wealth of particular traits of
character, the absolute manifestation of spiritual presence, its ideal
significance[127], as by means of the vital flash of the eye it will
concentrate in a point all the vigour of the soul. Sculpture must not,
in other words, accept a material which is not rendered necessary by
its fundamental point of view. It only makes use of the spatial
qualities of the human figure, not the colouring which depicts it. The
figure of sculpture is in general of one colour, hewn from white not
vari-coloured marble. And in the same way metals are used as the
material of sculpture, this primitive substance, self-identical,
essentially undifferentiated, a light in fluxion, if we may so express
it, without the contrast and harmony of different colours[128]. The
Greeks are indebted to their unrivalled artistic insight[129] for having
grasped and firmly retained this point of view. No doubt we find,
too, in Greek sculpture, to which we must for the main part confine
ourselves, examples of coloured statuary; we must, however, take
care in this respect to distinguish both the beginning and end of this
art from that which is created at its culminating point.
In the same way we must discount that which is admitted by art in
deference to traditional religion. We have already found it to be true
in the classical type of art that it does not forthwith and immediately
set forth the Ideal, in which its function is to discover its
fundamental lines of definition, but in the first instance removes
much that is inconsonant with it and foreign; it is the same case
precisely with sculpture. It is forced to pass through many
preliminary stages before it arrives at its perfection; and this initial
process differs very considerably from its supreme attainment. The
most ancient works of sculpture are of painted wood, as, for
example, Egyptian idols; we find similar productions among the
Greeks. We must, however, exclude such examples from genuine
sculpture when the main point is to establish its fundamental notion.
We are therefore in no way concerned to deny that there are many
examples at hand of painted statues. It is, however, also a fact that
the purer art-taste became, the more strongly "sculpture withdrew
itself from a brilliancy of colour that was not really congenial, and
with wise deliberation utilized, on the contrary, light and shadow in
order to secure for the beholder's eye a greater softness, repose,
clarity, and agreeableness[130]." As against the uniform colour of the
bare marble we may no doubt not merely instance the numerous
statues of bronze, but also in still stronger opposition the greatest
and most excellent works, which, as in the case of the Zeus of
Pheidias, were artificially coloured. But we are not here discussing
absence of colour in such an extreme abstract sense. Moreover, ivory
and gold are not primarily the use of colour as the painter employs
it; and generally we may add that the various works of a definite art
do not ever in fact retain fixedly their fundamental notion in so
abstract and unyielding a way, inasmuch as they come into contact
with the conditions of life subject to aims of all kinds; they are
placed in different environments, and are thereby associated with
circumstances of an external kind, which inevitably modify their real
and essential type. In this way the images of sculpture are not
unfrequently executed in rich material such as gold and ivory. They
are placed on magnificent chairs or stand on pedestals which display
all the extravagance and luxuriousness of art, or receive costly
decorations, in order that the nation, when face to face with such
splendid works, may likewise enjoy the sense of its power and
wealth. And sculpture in particular, for the reason that it is
essentially, taken by itself, a more abstract art, does not on all
occasions hold fast to such exclusiveness, but, on the one hand,
introduces incidentally much that is of a traditional, scholastic, or
local character as a contribution from its history, while, on the other,
it ministers to vital popular necessities. Active humanity demands for
its diversion variety, and seeks in diverse directions for a stimulus to
its vision and imagination. We may take as an analogous case the
reading aloud of Greek tragedies, which also brings before us the
work of art under its more abstract form. In the wider field of
external existence we have still to add, to make a public
performance, living actors, costume, stage scenery, dancing, and
music. And in like manner, too, the sculptured figure is unable to
dispense with much that is supplementary on its own stage of
reality. We are, however, only concerned here with the genuine work
of sculpture as such; external aspects such as those above adverted
to must not be permitted to prevent us bringing before the mind the
notion of our subject-matter in its most ideal and exclusive sense of
definition.
Proceeding now to the more definite heads of division in this section
we may observe that sculpture constitutes the very centre of the
classical type of art to such a degree that we are unable to accept
the symbolical, classical and romantic types as distinctions which
affect throughout and form the basis of our division. Sculpture is the
genuine art of the classical Ideal simply. It is quite true that
sculpture has also its stages in which it is in the grasp of the
symbolical type, as in Egypt for example. But these are rather
preliminary stages of its historical evolution, no genuine distinctions
which essentially affect the art of sculpture when notionally
considered, in so far, that is, as these exceptional examples, in the
manner of their execution and the use that is made of them, rather
belong to architecture than are strictly within the aim and purpose of
sculpture. In a similar way, when we find the romantic type thereby
expressed, sculpture passes beyond its rightful sphere, and only
receives with the qualified imitation of Greek sculpture its exclusively
plastic type. We must therefore look about us for a principle of
division of another character.
In agreement with what we have just stated we shall find that it is
from the particular way in which the classical Ideal means of
sculpture acquires a form of reality that most fully expresses it that
the focus of our present inquiry is derived. Before, however, we are
in a position to make an advance in this evolution of the ideal figure
of sculpture we must by way of introduction demonstrate what kind
of content and form are pertinent to the point of view of sculpture
regarded as a specific art, and the course it follows by virtue of both
until the point is reached where the classical Ideal is fully unfolded in
the human form permeated by spiritual life, and in its shape as
subject to spatial condition. From another point of view the classical
Ideal stands, and falls with an individuality which is unquestionably
substantive, but also to an equal degree essentially particularized, so
that sculpture does not accept for its content the Ideal of the human
form in its generality, but the Ideal as specifically defined; and, by
virtue of this fact, it is variously displayed under forms distinct from
each other. Such distinctions partly originate in the conception and
representation simply, in part are due to the material in which such
is realized, and which further, according to the way it affects
execution, introduces points of severation on its own account, to
both of which finally, as the last ground of difference, the various
stages are related in the historical development of sculpture.
Having made these observations we will indicate the course of our
inquiry as follows.
In the first place we have merely to deal with the general
determinants of the essential content and form, such as are
deducible from the notion of sculpture.
Secondly, as a further step, we have to differentiate more closely the
nature of the classical Ideal, in so far as it attains a determinate
existence in its most artistic form.
Thirdly, and finally, we shall find that sculpture avails itself of various
types of presentation and material, and expands to a world of
productions, in which, either under one aspect or another, the
symbolical or romantic types also definitely assert themselves, albeit
it is the classical which constitutes the true point of centre between
them in plastic art[131].

CHAPTER I

THE PRINCIPLE OF GENUINE SCULPTURE

Sculpture, to put the matter in general terms, conceives the
astounding project of making Spirit imagine itself in an exclusively
material medium, and so shape this external medium that it is
presented to itself in such and recognizes the presentment to be the
objective form adequate to its ideal substance.
In this respect our inquiry will take the following directions.
First, we have the question what kind of spiritual life is capable of
being reproduced in this material of a form entirely sensuous and
spatial.
Secondly, we have to ask in what manner the forms of the spatial
condition have to be modified in order to permit us a recognition of
the spiritual in the bodily shape of beauty.
What we have generally to consider here is the unity between the
ordo rerum extensarum and that of the ordo rerum idearum, the
primal fair union of soul and body, in so far as spiritual ideality is
expressed by sculpture exclusively in its bodily existence.
This union, thirdly, corresponds to what we have already found to be
the Ideal of the classical type of art; and for this reason the plastic
forms of sculpture are nothing less than the very art itself of the
classical Ideal.

1. THE ESSENTIAL CONTENT OF SCULPTURE

The elementary medium, in which sculpture realizes its creations is,

as we have seen, the elementary, still universal material subject to
spatial condition, in which no further particularization can be utilized
for an artistic purpose than the universal spatial dimensions, and the
more detailed[132] spatial forms which are compatible with these
dimensions under their most beautiful configuration. Now what most
exceptionally corresponds as content to this more abstract aspect of
the sensuous material is the objectivity of Spirit which reposes on its
own resources, in so far, that is, as Spirit has neither differentiated
itself in contradistinction to its universal substance, nor to its
determinate existence in its bodily presence, and consequently is not
as yet withdrawn as independent self-subsistency into its own
subjective world. There are two points we would draw attention to
here.
(a) Spirit as Spirit[133] is no doubt always subjectivity, that is ideal
knowledge of the Self, the Ego. This Ego can, however, separate
itself from everything that constitutes, whether in knowledge,
volition, conception, feeling, action, or achievement, the universal
and eternal content of Spirit, and can concentrate its hold on that
aspect of individual experience which is unique and contingent. It is
then subjectivity as such which we have before us, which has let go
the truly objective content of Spirit, and is self-related formally, and
without content. In the case of self-satisfaction, for example, I can
no doubt view myself from a certain standpoint in an entirely
objective way and remain satisfied with myself on account of moral
action. I do, however, as thus self-satisfied, already withdraw myself
from the content of such action. I separate myself as a distinct
person, as this particular Ego, from the universality of Spirit, in order
to compare myself with it. The sense of unison of myself with myself
through this comparison produces this self-satisfaction, in which this
determinate Ego, as this core of unity, rejoices in itself. No doubt this
personal Ego is involved in all that a man knows, wills, or carries
out; but it makes an immense difference whether, in-dealing with
knowledge and action, the matter of concern is the man's own
unique Ego, or that in which the essential content of consciousness
consists; whether, in other words, a man sinks himself and his self-
identity in this content, or lives in the unbroken seclusion of his
subjective personality.
(α) In this exaltation over what is substantive[134] the subjective life
passes into the abstract and disrupt world of personal inclination,
the caprice and contingency of emotions and impulses, owing to
which, in the changes to which it is subject in particular acts and
undertakings, it grows dependent upon particular circumstances as
they happen to arise, and is unable generally to dispense with this
association with something else. In such a condition of dependence
the individual life is nothing but finite subjectivity as contrasted with
a real spirituality. And if this personal state essentially persists
through the volition and knowledge which characterizes it in this
contradiction of its conscious life, it can only further become involved
—to put on one side the mere emptiness of its imaginings and self-
conceits—in the deformity of character and its evil passions, in crime
and moral offence, in malice, cruelty, obstinacy, envy, pride,
insolence, and every other kind of the reverse side of human nature
and its insubstantial finiteness.
(β) This province of the subjective life must be excluded in its
entirety and without hesitation from the content of sculpture. The
art is exclusively co-extensive with the objectivity of Spirit. And by
the term objectivity we mean in this connection what is substantive,
genuine, not transitory, the essential nature of Spirit, apart from its
involvement in that which is accidental and evanescent, for which
the individual person is responsible simply in his unmediated state of
self-relation.
(γ) Spirit, however, even in its truly objective sense, can only realize
itself as Spirit when associated with explicit self-identity. Spirit is only
Spirit as self-consciousness[135]. The position, however, of this
aspect of individual consciousness in the spiritual content of
sculpture is of such a character that it is not independently
expressed, but displays itself as throughout interfused with this
substantive content, and not formally reflected back upon itself apart
from it. We may consequently affirm that though such a mode of
objectivity possesses a type of self-subsistency, yet it is a self-
knowledge and volition which is not released from the content it
fulfils, but forms an inseparable unity with it.
The presentment of Spirit in this complete and independent
seclusion of what is essentially substantive and true, this
unperturbed and unparticularized being of Spirit, is that which we
name divinity in its contrast to finitude, which is the process of
disruption into contingent existence, a world that is broken into
complex forms and varied movement. From this point of view the
function of sculpture is to present the Divine simply in its infinite
repose and sublimity, timeless, destitute of motion, entirely without
subjective personality in the strict sense and the conflict of action or
situation. And in proceeding to the more detailed definition of our
humanity in shape and character, it must, nevertheless, exclusively
rivet its attention on what is unalterable and permanent, in other
words what is truly substantive in its characterization, and merely
select such aspects for its content, passing over what it finds there
of an accidental or evanescent nature; and it must do so for the
reason that the objectivity which it presents does not rightly include
a differentiation of this fluctuating and fleeting kind, and one which
comes into being by virtue of a subjective consciousness whose
conception of itself is that of pure insulation. In a biography, for
instance, which gives an account of the motley incidents, events,
and exploits of some individual, we find as a rule the course of
varied developments and fortuities finally closed by a character
sketch which summarizes the entire breadth of detail in a few
general qualities such as goodness, honest dealing, courage,
exceptional intelligence, and so forth. Characteristics such as these
we may term the permanent features of a personality; the remaining
peculiarities it possesses are merely accidental features in the
impersonation. It is just this stable aspect of life which it is the part
of sculpture to present as the unique being and determinate
substance of individuality. Yet we must not suppose that it creates
allegories out of such general qualities. It rather builds up true
individuals, which it conceives and informs as essentially complete
and enclosed within their objective spiritual presence, in their self-
subsistent repose, delivered thereby from all antagonism as against
external objects. In the presentment of an individuality of this
character by sculpture what is truly substantive is throughout the
essential foundation, and neither purely subjective self-knowledge
and emotion, nor a superficial and mutable singularity[136] must be
permitted in any way to be predominant, but what is eternal in the
god-like and our humanity should, divested of all the caprice and
contingency of the particular self[137], be set before our eyes in its
unimpaired clarity.
(b) The further point we would draw attention to consists in this,
that the content of sculpture, for the reason that its material
requires an external presentment in the complete form of the three
spatial dimensions, is also unable to be a spiritual content as such,
that is, the ideality self-enclosed within and absorbed into itself, but
rather in the sense that it is only explicit in its opposed factor, in
other words, the bodily form. The negation of what is external is
already implied in the ideal subjective consciousness, and can
therefore have no place here, where what is divine and human is
accepted as content with exclusive reference to its objective
characteristics. And it is only this self-absorbed objective aspect,
which does not comprise ideal subjectivity in the strict sense[138],
that gives free play to an externality conditioned in all its three
dimensions, and is capable of being associated with such a spatial
totality. For these reasons it is incumbent on sculpture that it only
accept out of the objective content of Spirit that which admits of the
fullest expression in external and bodily shape; if it do otherwise it
simply selects a content which its specific material is unable to
assimilate or to unite with an adequate mode of exposition.

2. THE BEAUTIFUL FORM OF SCULPTURE

We must now inquire into the nature of the bodily forms which are
adapted to give an impression of a content of this kind.
Just as in classical architecture the dwelling-house is the anatomical
skeleton framework which art has to inform with its accretions, in
like manner sculpture, on its part, discovers the human form as the
fundamental type for its figures. Whereas, however, the house is
already a piece of human workmanship, though not as yet
elaborated artistically, the structure of the human form, on the
contrary, appears as a product of Nature unaffected by man. The
fundamental type of sculpture is consequently given to it, that is,
does not hail from human inventiveness. The expression, however,
that the human form is a part of Nature is a very indefinite one,
which we must submit to closer analysis.
In Nature it is the Idea, which is given there, as we have already
found when discussing natural beauty, its primary and immediate
mode of existence, receiving in animal life and its complete organic
structure the natural existence adequate to its notion. The
organization of the animal frame is therefore a birth of the notion in
its essential totality, which exists in this corporeal mode of being as
soul, yet, as the principle of merely animal life, modifies the animal
frame in the most varied classifications, albeit too every specific type
continues to be subject to the general notion[139]. The fact that
notion and bodily form, or more accurately, soul and body,
correspond to one another—to fully understand this is the problem
of natural philosophy. We should have to demonstrate that the
different systems of the animal frame in their ideal[140] structure and
conformation no less than their association, and the more definite
organs in which the bodily existence is differentiated are in general
accord with the phasal steps of the notion's movement, so that it
becomes clear, to what extent we have here presented to us as real
only the particular aspects of the soul-life which are necessary. To
develop this exposition, however, does not lie within the scope of the
present inquiry.
The human form is not, however, as the animal form, merely the
corporeal framework of the soul, but of Spirit. In other words, spirit
and soul are essentially to be distinguished. For the soul is merely
this ideal and simple unity of self-subsistence attaching to the body
in its corporeal aspect[141], whereas Spirit is the independent
selfness of conscious and self-conscious life together with all the
emotions, ideas, and aims of such a conscious existence. In
contemplating the immense difference which separates merely
animal life from spiritual consciousness, it may appear strange that
the bodily frame attaching to the latter, the human body, is
nevertheless so clearly homogeneous with that of animal life. It will
tend, however, to decrease such an astonishment if we recall to
mind the definition, which Spirit itself has authorized us to make in
accordance with its own notion, that it is a mode of life and
essentially therefore itself also a living soul and natural existence. As
such living soul the life of conscious spirit, by virtue of the same
notion that is inherent in the animal soul, is entitled to accept a
body, which fundamentally in its general lines runs parallel to the
organic structure of animal life. However superior to mere animal life
Spirit may be it is evolved through[142] a corporeal frame whose
visible appearance receives an identical articulation and principle of
life with that which the notion of animal life in general underlies.
Inasmuch as, however, and furthermore Spirit is not merely the Idea
as determinate existence, that is, the Idea as Nature and animal life,
but the Idea which secures independence in its own free medium of
ideality as Idea, the spiritual principle elaborates for itself its own
specific mode of objectivity over and beyond that of animal life,
simply, in other words, science, the reality of which is exclusively
that of thought itself. Apart from thought, however, and its
philosophical and systematized activity, Spirit is involved within an
abounding life of feeling, inclination, idea, imagination, and so forth,
which is fixed in a more direct or less immediate association with its
vital being[143] and bodily frame, and consequently possesses a
reality in the human body. In this reality, which is part of its own
substance, Spirit asserts itself also as a principle of life, shines into
it, transpierces it, and is made manifest to others by means of it.
Consequently, in so far as the human body remains no purely natural
existence, but has asserted itself also in its configuration and
structure as the natural and sensuous existence of Spirit, it is,
nevertheless, regarded as the expression of an ideality more exalted
than that compatible with the purely animal body to be distinguished
from it, despite the fact that the human body in its broad lines is in
harmony with it. For this reason, however, that Spirit is itself soul
and life, that is, an animal body, it is and can only be modifications,
which the indwelling Spirit of one living body attaches to this
corporeal form. As a manifestation of Spirit consequently the human
shape is distinct from the animal by virtue of these modifications,
albeit the distinctions of the human organism from the animal are as
much the result of the unconscious creation of spiritual activities, as
the soul of the animal kingdom is the informing though unconscious
activity of the body that belongs to it.
We have thus reached the precise point of our present departure. In
other words, the human body is present to the artist as Spirit's
expression. What is more, he discovers it as such not merely in a
general way, but also in particular characteristics it is pre-supposed
to be the type which, in its form, its specific traits, its position and
general habit, reflects the ideality of Spirit.
We shall find it a difficult matter to fix in clear terms of thought the
precise nature of the association between spirit and body in their
relation respectively to feeling, passion, and other spiritual
conditions. It has, no doubt, been attempted to develop the same
scientifically both from the pathognomical[144] point of view and the
physiognomical. Such attempts have hitherto not met with much
success. For ourselves the science of physiognomy can only be of
importance in so far as that of pathognomy is exclusively concerned
with the mode under which definite feelings and passions are
physically located in particular organs. It has been stated, for
example, that the seat of anger is in the gall, of courage in the
blood. Such statements, we may remark incidentally, are erroneous
in their manner of expression. For even assuming the activity of
particular organs corresponds to specific passions, we cannot say
that anger, for instance, has its local position in the gall bladder, but,
in so far as anger is corporeally related, the gall is pre-eminently
that in which its active appearance asserts itself. In our present
inquiry this pathognomical aspect does not, as already stated,
concern us, because sculpture has merely to deal with that which
passes over from the ideal side of Spirit into the external aspect of
form permitting Spirit thus to be visible in the physical environment.
The sympathetic interaction between the internal organism and the
feeling soul is no object of sculpture; indeed, we may add, it is
unable to accept much which appears on the external surface itself,
such as the tremble of the hand and the entire body in an outburst
of anger, the movement of the lips, and others of like nature.
With regard to physiognomical science I will limit myself to this
observation. If the work of sculpture, which has as its fundamental
basis the human form, has to exhibit the way in which the bodily
presence as such manifests not only the divine and human aspect of
Spirit in its broadest and most substantive features, but also the
particular character of a definite individuality in this divine presence,
we are no doubt compelled to discuss what parts, traits, and
conformations of the body are fully accordant with any specific mode
of ideality. We are indeed forced upon such an inquiry by the
sculpture of antiquity, which we must as a matter of fact admit
includes the expression of individual god-like characters with that of
divinity generally. Such an admission does not, however, amount to
an assertion that the association of spiritual expression with bodily
form is merely a matter of accident and caprice rather than the
creation of a figure of self-subsistent actuality. In this connection
every organ must, in a general way, be looked at from two points of
view, as a mode of expression that possesses its physical side no
less than its spiritual. We need hardly caution our readers that the
method of Gall in conducting such an inquiry is inadmissible. This
writer reduces Spirit to what is little better than a Calvary.
(a) The advance of sculpture, in respect to the content which its
function is to declare, is limited to the investigation how far the
substantive and at the same time individual condition of spiritual life
is made vital in bodily form, receiving therein determinate existence
and form. In other words, through the content adequate to genuine
sculpture the contingent individualization of the external appearance
is from one point of view excluded, and this applies both to the
spiritual and physical aspects of the presentment. Only that which
persists, and is universal and according to rule in the human form is
the object of a work of sculpture. And this is so albeit we have the
additional necessity to individualize the universal in such a way that
not only the abstract law but an individual form, which is brought
into the closest fusion with it, is placed before our eyes.
(b) From another point of view it is necessary that sculpture, as we
have seen, be kept unaffected by purely contingent personal
life[145], and all expression of such in the independent ideal mode
under which it asserts itself. For this reason an artist, in dealing with
physiognomical characteristics, is not entitled to move in the
direction of individual manner[146]. For a facial manner is simply just
this appearance on the surface of an individual idiosyncrasy and
some particular aspect of emotion, idea, and volition. A man by his
chance expressions of countenance expresses the feelings he has as
some particular person, whether it be in his exclusive relation to his
own life, or in his self-relation to exterior objects, or other persons.
One sees, for example, on the street, more particularly in little
towns, in many, or rather the majority of men, that they are
exclusively preoccupied, in their demeanour and expression of face,
with themselves, their dress and attire, in general terms, that is,
their purely personal particularity, or, at least, matters of momentary
importance, and any unforeseen or accidental features thus
presented. Countenances which express pride, envy, self-
satisfaction, depreciation, and so forth, are of this nature. Moreover,
the feeling and contrast of substantive being with my personal
idiosyncrasy may be responsible for such alterations of expression.
Humility, defiance, threats, fear, are expressed in this way. In a felt
contrast of this kind we find already a separation between the
individual in the subjective sense and the universal asserted.
Reflection on what is truly substantive continually leans in the
direction of merely personal considerations, so that it is the
individual rather than the substantive character which is
predominant in the content. The form, however, which remains
severely true to the principle of sculpture ought neither to express
this severation nor the predominance of the personal aspect above
adverted to.
In addition to definite expressions of countenance[147] physiognomy
presents us with much that merely passes momentarily across the
features and indicates the human mood. A sudden smile, an
instantaneous outburst of anger, a quickly repressed expression of
scorn, are a few of many examples. In particular, the mouth and
eyes possess most mobility and resource in seizing and making
apparent every shifting mood of soul-life. Changes of this character,
which are compatible with the art of painting, the sculptor must
exclude. Sculpture must rather concentrate its attention on the
permanent traits of spiritual expression, and retain and disclose such
in the posture and configuration of the body no less than in the face.
(c) The task of sculpture, then, essentially consists in this, that it
implants that which is of substantive spiritual import in that form of
individuality which is not yet essentially particularized in the narrow
subjective sense within the figure of a man, and contributes to the
same such a harmony, that it is only that which is universal and
permanent in the bodily shapes correspondent with the life of Spirit
which is made to appear therein, while that which is accidental or
mutable is brushed aside, albeit a certain mode of individuality is not
absent from its forms.
An accord of this complete nature between what is ideal and what is
external, the goal of sculpture, in short, offers us a point of
transition to the third point which we have still to discuss.

3. SCULPTURE AS THE ART OF THE CLASSICAL IDEAL

The conclusion that most immediately follows upon the above

observations is this, that sculpture in a way, and to an extent
unrivalled by any other art, remains constant to the Ideal[148]. In
other words, from one point of view it is free of the symbolical type
both by virtue of the translucency of a content, which clearly grasps
itself as Spirit, and on account of the fact that it is able to disclose
such a content with absolute mastery. And so, too, from another it
refuses as yet to enter into the subjective aspect of the personal life,
to which the external form is indifferent. Consequently it forms the
focus of classical art. No doubt both the symbolical and romantic
types of architecture and painting were shown to be adapted to
classical ideality; but the Ideal, in its genuine sphere, is not the
supreme principle of these types of art, inasmuch as they do not, as
is the case with sculpture, take for their object self-subsistent
individuality, character, that is, throughout objective, in other words,
the beauty that is both free and inevitable[149]. The configuration of
sculpture must, however, entirely proceed from the pure spiritual
energy of an imagination and thought that denudes its content of all
the haphazard features of personal life and bodily presence; it must
have no leanings for idiosyncrasies, or any place for the mere
emotion, desire, and variety of accidental impulse and
pleasantry[150]. What the artist has at his disposal for his most
elevated creations is simply, as we have seen, the bodily
presentment of Spirit in what is exclusively the general configuration
of the organic structure of the human form. His invention is
therefore restricted to promoting on the broadest lines the harmony
between what is ideal and what is external, and partly to making, in
however an inobtrusive way, the individuality of the presentment
accommodate itself to and interfuse with the truly substantive
character of his design[151]. Sculpture must give form, just as the
gods create in their own sphere according to eternal ideas, within
what is in other respects the world of reality, but exclude as rejected
residue all licence and mere selfness from its creations. Theologians
make a distinction between the acts of God and all that man in his
folly and capriciousness accomplishes. The plastic Ideal is, however,
exalted above such questions. It stands at the very centre of this
blessedness and free necessity for which neither the abstraction of
the universal nor the caprice of the particular are valid or significant.
This insight into the consummate plastic union of the divine and
human was pre-eminently native to Greece. We fail to grasp Greece
at her heart and centre in her poets and orators, historians and
philosophers, unless, as the key to our problem, we are already
possessed of an insight into the Ideal of sculpture, and can
contemplate from the standpoint of plastic art both the figures of her
epic and dramatic heroes and her actual statesmen and
philosophers. For characters in her practical life, no less than poets
and thinkers, possessed also in the palmy days of Greece, this
plastic, universal, and yet individual character, stamped with one
mint, whether we look at its external or more personal features.
They stand up big and free, a self-subsistent growth, on the basis of
their essentially substantive individuality; a growth of their own
making, built up into that which they ultimately became and
intended to be. In particular the period of Pericles was rich in such
characters. Pericles himself was one of them. We may add Pheidias,
Plato, and pre-eminently Sophocles. So, too, Thucydides, Xenophon,
and Socrates, everyone with his own type, not one of them impairing
the quality of the rest; all are out-and-out artistic natures, ideal
artists in the work of self-creation, personalities of one mould, works
of art, which stand before us like figures of immortal gods, in whom
we can detect no taint of Time and mortality. We may find a similar
plastic subsistency in the artistic perfections of the bodily frames of
the victors at the Olympic games; nay, even in the apparition of
Phryne[152] herself, who, as the fairest woman, came from the sea
naked before all the world.

CHAPTER II

THE IDEAL OF SCULPTURE

Now that we pass on to consider the really ideal style of sculpture

we must once again recall the fact that the perfected type
necessarily presupposes the imperfect as its predecessor; and it
does so not merely in relation to its technique, which, in the first
instance, does not concern us here, but in respect to the general
notion, in other words the mode of its conception and the particular
way in which it sets forth the same ideally. We have in general terms
called the symbolical type that of inquiry; consequently pure
sculpture, too, has for its presupposition a certain stage of the
symbolical type, and by this we do not merely mean a stage of the
symbolic form as generally conceived, in other words of architecture,
but a form of sculpture which is itself characterized by the symbolical
principle. We shall find an opportunity of supporting this assertion
with the example of Egyptian sculpture in the third chapter.
We may in this place and from the point of view of the Ideal
generally, and for the present wholly in an abstract and formal
manner, assume that which we term symbolical in a specific art is its
incompleteness; as, for example, we may so apply this term to an
attempt of children to draw the human figure, or mould it from wax
and clay. What they execute is to this extent merely a symbol, as it
only suggests the living reality it purports to exhibit, remaining,
however, wholly unfaithful to the actual object and its significance.
Art is consequently in the first instance hieroglyphical, no mere
accidental and capricious mark, but a haphazard delineation of an
object for the imagination. For this purpose a badly drawn figure
suffices if it recalls that object it is intended to suggest. In a similar
way piety is content with badly executed images, and still worships
Christ, the Virgin, and any other saint in the most bungling
counterfeit, although such images may merely derive such
individualization purely from particular attributes conveyed by such
means as a lantern or a mill-stone. For piety refuses to be reminded
of aught save the object; the soul adds all else thereto, which will be
filled up with an image of the object, however untrue the counterfeit
may be. It is not the living expression of the present which is
required; it is not that which is presented which is intended to
enkindle us by itself. Rather a work of art of this kind already brings
satisfaction if it excites the general concept of the objects by virtue
of its images, however insufficient they be. A concept of this kind,
however, already abstracts from the given content. I can readily
imagine some known thing, such as a house, a tree, a man; but
even in such a case, where the reference is to something quite
determinate, the concept merely includes wholly general traits, and
is in fact only a true concept[153] in so far as it has effaced from the
concrete presentment the wholly immediate singularity of the
objects and simplified the same. If the imaged concept, which the
work of art has to arouse in us, is that of the divine nature, and if
this has to receive recognition from an entire people, this object is
especially attainable when no alteration is allowed in the mode of
presentation. For this reason art is on the one hand conventional,
and on the other scholastic[154]; and this is so not merely in the
case of the more ancient Egyptians, but also in that of more ancient
Greek and Christian art. The artist in such case was bound to restrict
himself to definite forms and to repeat their type.
The crucial point of transition, where fine art wakes from its sleep,
must consequently be sought there, where at last the artist is
creative by virtue of his own free conception, where the flash of
genius strikes into the material presented, and communicates
freshness and vitality to the presentment. Then for the first time the
atmosphere of mind[155] enfolds the work of art, which is no longer
restricted to merely calling up in a general way some idea before the
mind, and recalling to it some deeper significance which the
spectator already is essentially possessed of, but which proceeds to
make visible this significance as throughout made vitally present in
some individualized creation, and which consequently neither makes
no further advance beyond the purely superficial generality of its
forms, nor binds itself on the other hand, in respect to the detail of
its delineation, to the characteristics of all that common reality offers
it.
In the rise of ideal sculpture we presuppose perforce a complete
passage to such a sphere of creation. In establishing the facts of this
appearance we may emphasize the following points of view.
First, we have to address ourselves to the general character of the
ideal form in its contrast to the stages previously discussed.
Secondly, we shall have to adduce specific aspects of it, the
importance of which is most obvious, such as the way in which facial
characteristics, drapery, and pose are modelled or treated.
Thirdly, we have to enforce the position that the ideal figure is not
merely a general type of beauty in the formal sense of type, but
includes, by virtue of its principle of individuality, which belongs to
the really living Ideal, essentially, too, the aspect of differentiation
and specific definition within its own sphere, and by this means the
province of sculpture is expanded in a cycle of particularized images
of gods and heroes.

1. THE GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE IDEAL FIGURE OF SCULPTURE

We have already examined at length what the general principle of

the classical ideal is. Our present inquiry is therefore limited to the
particular mode under which this principle is realized through the
medium of sculpture in the human form. In this connection the lines
of difference between the human physiognomy, expressive as it is of
spiritual life and the general build of the animal organism, which is
unable to pass beyond the mere expression of natural life in its
unbroken association with natural wants and an organism that is
exclusively adapted to their satisfaction, will supply us with a
standard of comparison which carries us considerably further. Yet
even such a standard is still somewhat indefinite for the reason that
the human form alone neither is as bodily form, or as an expression
of Spirit, wholly and as we find it first of ideal type. On the contrary
we may observe with more closeness from the fine masterpieces of
Greek sculpture what the ideal of sculpture in the spiritually fine
expression of its creations has to bring before us. It was pre-
eminently Winckelmann who, with this intimate knowledge of and
devotion for art of this kind, and by means of his receptive
enthusiasm, no less than his intelligence and critical faculty, made an
end of indefinite statements over the Ideal of Greek beauty by
leaving the characterization of detail in the form at once distinct and
precise, an endeavour which by itself is full of instruction. No doubt
the results he obtained supply abundant opportunity for further
criticism, exceptions, and the like; but we should be careful, before
attempting to criticize details and errors in his work, not to obscure
the main result which he established. However far aesthetic science
may extend its borders that at least must be pre-supposed as
essential. Assuming this, it cannot, however, be denied that since
Winckelmann's death our knowledge of the antique has not only
been essentially enlarged in the number of examples submitted to
criticism, but also has been placed on a securer basis in its relation
to the style of these works and the true appreciation of their beauty.
Winckelmann, no doubt, passed under review a great number of
Egyptian and Greek statues; we have, however, added in more
recent times the closer acquaintance of the Aeginetan sculptures, no
less than those masterworks which in part are ascribed to Pheidias
and in part we must recognize as creations of his age and under his
supervision. In a word we have secured a more intimate knowledge
of a number of sculptures, whether single statues or reliefs, which,
in their relation to the severity of the ideal style, are referable to the
age in which Greek art was at its fullest bloom. For these astonishing
monuments of Greek sculpture, as is well known, we are indebted to
the efforts of Lord Elgin, who, as English ambassador to Turkey, had
a number of statues and reliefs of the greatest beauty taken from
the Parthenon at Athens and other towns to England. People have
blamed such acquisitions and called them temple robbery. Lord Elgin
has, however, as a matter of fact, really rescued these works of art
for Europe and preserved them from complete destruction. Such an
enterprise deserves its true recognition. Moreover, it is due to this
circumstance that the interest of all connoisseurs and friends of art
have been directed to an epoch and a mode of presentation, which,
in the exceptionally consistent severity of its style, constitutes the
true greatness and height of the Ideal. What the general verdict has
highly estimated in the works of this epoch is not the charm and
grace of form and pose, not the elegance of expression which
already, as in the times subsequent to Pheidias, makes an external
appeal and distinctly aims at pleasing the spectator, nor yet the
delicacy and boldness of the elaboration; rather the general chorus
of praise is concentrated upon the expression of self-subsistency and
essential repose in these figures, and more especially has this note
of admiration been most emphatic by virtue of the free vitality, the
absolute transfusion of and command over the purely natural and
material aspect, a command by which the artist moulds the marble,
makes it alive and endows it with a soul. And we may add that when
all has been said that can be said in such praise the figure of the
reclining river-god remains as most emphatically its object, which is
one of the finest examples of antique art we have recovered.
(a) The vitality of these works consists in this, that they are the free
product of the genius of the artist. The artist at this stage is neither
satisfied with giving, by means of general and haphazard contours,
suggestions and expressions, a general conception of that which he
desires to reproduce, nor does he, on the other hand, in respect to
what is individual and singular, accept the forms as he has received
them by chance from the external world. For this reason also he
does not present them again with loyalty to this accidental aspect,
but he is concerned to place within his own free creation what is
empirically particularized in isolated aspects that thus appear in a
further individual accord with the universal types of the human form,
an accord which is made to appear as throughout transpierced with
the spiritual configuration of that which he is called to make
apparent, when he suffers us to see his own vitality, conception and
animation in the work regarded on the side of the artist's activity.
The universal aspect of the content of his work is not due to his
creation. It is presented him by means of mythology and saga
precisely in the way that he finds the general effect and details of
the human form; but the free and living individualization, which
permeates all portions on his work, is the result of his own personal
point of view, his efforts and services.
(b) The effect and charm of this vitality and freedom is only
produced by means of the sufficiency, the honest candour of the
elaboration of all the particular parts to which the most definite
knowledge and review of the construction of these parts belongs, no
less in their position of repose than also in that of their motion. The
way in which the different members are disposed and moulded with
regard to rondure and smoothness, in every condition of rest and
movement, must be expressed in the most satisfactory way. This
fundamental elaboration and placing in relief of all the separate parts
we find in all products of antique art, and the animation thus
produced is only the effect of infinite pains and truth. When the eye
contemplates works of this kind it is, in the first instance, unable
clearly to recognize a mass of distinction; and it is only by virtue of a
particular manner of lighting that we can appreciate the same by
means of a stronger contrast between light and shadow. But though
these fine nuances are imperceptible at first glance, the general
impression they produce is not for that reason lost. In part they
appear as the spectator varies his point of view, and in part we
derive from them what is essentially the impression of the organic
continuity of all the members and their forms. This spirit of vitality,
this soul of material configuration, is due wholly to the fact that,
though every part is entirely complete in its separable independence,
yet it is to a like extent throughout, by virtue of the wealth of its
modes of transition, associated not merely with the part that is
immediately its neighbour, but with the entire work. For this reason
the form is vital in every part of it; the least detail of it is stamped
with purpose; every part of it is differentiated from the rest,
possesses that which distinguishes it and makes it distinct, and yet is
affected by the same fluidity of treatment, is only what it is vitally as
a part of the whole, so that we are able to recognize the whole in
the very fragments of it, and a part that is broken off enables us not
merely to see but to enjoy a totality that is not thus mutilated. The
material surface, although for the most part statues are now
seriously impaired by the weather and other causes in this respect,
presents a soft and malleable appearance; and in one particular
example of the head of a horse I have in mind it literally glows with
the ardour of life on the face of the marble itself. This scarce
perceptible undercurrent of fluidity in all organic parts, united to the
most conscientious elaboration which avoids purely regular surfaces
and anything approaching the bare convexity of circular shape,
supplies that softness and ideality of all parts, that harmonious unity,
which extends throughout the whole as the spiritual breath of one
animating presence.
(c) However true, notwithstanding, expression of detailed or general
configuration may be, this truth is no mere imitation of Nature
simply. Sculpture is always occupied with the abstraction of form,
and is consequently obliged, on the one hand, to omit from the
bodily presentment what is most essentially the natural aspect, in
other words, what is exclusively indicative of natural function. From
a further point of view it is unable to carry to extremes its
particularization of detail, but rather as, for example, in its treatment
of hair, must restrict its attention and reproduction to the more
general of its forms. In this way, apart from any other, the human
figure, when properly treated by sculpture, is at once declared as
the form and expression of Spirit, rather than of a purely natural
form. Closely connected with this consideration is the fact that,
though a spiritual content is expressed by means of sculpture in the
bodily form, yet in the genuine Ideal it is not asserted so
prominently in the exterior form to the extent of making that which
is simply external in its charm and grace either the exclusive or
predominant attraction to the spectator. On the contrary, though the
genuine and more severe Ideal of Spirituality is here presented in
bodily shape, and is exclusively thus presented by means of such
shape and its expression, yet this configuration must equally appear
to be without exception unified, supported and transfused by this
ideal content. The swell of life, the malleability and bodily presence,
or sensuous fulness and beauty of the bodily organism, must as little
supply independently the object of the presentation, as what is
individual in the spiritual presence can be carried to the length of
expressing the more intimate and more closely related inner life of
the spectator, when we consider his own particularity.

2. THE PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF THE IDEAL FORM OF SCULPTURE AS SUCH

If we direct our attention now to the more specific consideration of
the fundamental phases, on which the ideal form of sculpture
reposes, we shall do well to follow Winckelmann in essentials, who
has laid stress on the several types with the finest intuitive sense,
and with the most fortunate results, as well as on the way in which
the same have been treated and shaped by Greek artists, with the
result that they finally present to us the Ideal of sculpture. The
vitality, this floating emanation no doubt evades the definitions of
the understanding, which in the present case is unable to hold fast
and transpierce the particular as in architecture, which, however,
asserts itself in the entire work, as we have already seen, as the
coalescence of free spirituality and bodily forms.
The first general feature of distinction which arrests us concerns the
determination of works of sculpture in a general way, by virtue of
which the human form has to express that which is spiritual. The
spiritual expression, albeit it has to be poured forth over the entire
bodily presence reaches its highest degree of concentration in the
facial form, whereas the remaining members are merely able to
reflect what is spiritual by means of their position, in so far, that is,
as the same proceeds from Spirit in its essential freedom.
In our examination of these ideal forms we will make a beginning in
the first place with the head; we will, then, in the second place
enlarge upon the position of the body, after which we shall conclude
with the principle of the drapery.
(a) In the ideal configuration of the human head we are first and
foremost confronted with the so-called Greek profile.
(α) This profile consists in the peculiar union of the forehead and
nose; in the almost straight or merely slightly crooked line in which
the forehead unites without interruption with the nose, as also, to
speak more accurately, in the vertical direction of this line to another
which, extending it from the root of the nose to the orifice of the
ear, forms a right angle with the line of the forehead and nose above
mentioned. In a line of this sort nose and forehead stand throughout
to one another in the ideal and fine art of sculpture, and the
question presents itself whether this is a merely national and artistic
contingency or a physiological necessity.
Camper, the famous Dutch physiologist, has, with more exactness
and in an exceptional way, characterized this line as the line of facial
beauty; he in fact discovers therein the main distinction between the
form of the human visage and the profile of animal life; and on
account of this follows up the modifications of this feature
throughout the various human races. In this respect his researches
are no doubt in conflict with those of Blumenbach[156]. Speaking
generally, however, the line adverted to is in fact a most marked
means of distinction between the outward form of man and animal.
Among animals, it is true, muzzle and nasal bone also form a more
or less straight line, but the specific projection of the animal's snout,
which is forced to the front, as being in the nearest practical relation
to objects, is essentially determined through its connection with the
skull, united to which the ear is moreover placed above or below, so
that in the present instance the line that is carried forward from the
skull to the root of the nose or the upper jaw, where the teeth are in
position, forms an acute angle instead of a right angle as is found in
the case of man. Everybody can independently feel in a general way
the strength of this distinction, which no doubt opens the path to
more definite thinking on the subject.
(αα) In the formation of the head of animals the most insistent
feature is the mouth as the organ by means of which it feeds in co-
operation with the upper and lower jaws, the teeth, and the muscles
of mastication. All the other organs are subordinate and in a position
of subservience to this principal feature. Notably the snout as a
means of scenting food, the eyes being to a lesser degree
instrumental in spying it out. The express insistence on these animal
features as exclusively devoted to the natural wants and their
satisfaction gives to the head of the animal the appearance as
though intended merely to satisfy natural functions without any trace
of spiritual ideality. For this reason the entire animal organism is
rendered intelligible from the mouth as a point of departure. A
specific mode of nourishment, that is to say, requires a specific
structure of the muzzle, a particular formation of the teeth, together
with which the structure of the jaw bones, the muscles of
mastication, cheek-bones, and, moreover, the vertebrae, the
thighbones, claws, and so forth all stand in the closest relation. The
body of the animal merely subserves natural ends and on account of
this dependence on the purely material aspect of nourishment gives
the impression of absence of spirit. If, then, the human countenance
is, even in its bodily conformation, to possess a spiritual stamp,
those organs which in the animal form are so predominant must in
the case of man, retire from such a pre-eminence and give way to
those which do not so much suggest a practical relation as one that
is referable to the ideality of mind.
(ββ) The human countenance has consequently a second central
point, in which that attitude to facts, which indicates the relation of
the soul or spirit, is declared. We find this in the upper portion of the
face, in the thoughtful brow and the eye, through which we face the
soul, which looms out beneath it, together with its environment.
Thought, reflection—that is, the introspection of the spiritual identity
—is necessarily connected with the forehead, whose internal life in
concentrated clarity looks forth from the eye. Through the
prominence of the forehead and the correspondingly retreating
appearance of the mouth and the cheek-bones the human
countenance derives its spiritual character. This projection of the
brow is therefore necessarily that which determines the entire
formation of the skull, which no longer falls back, forming the side of
an acute angle as its extreme point the mouth is pressed to the
front[157], but rather permits of a line being drawn from the
forehead through the nose to the point of the chin, which, with a
second drawn over the rear of the skull to the apex of the forehead,
form a right angle, or one at least which approximates to it.
(γγ) Thirdly, we may say that the nose forms the passage and
connection between the lower and upper portion of the face, that is
to say, between the purely contemplative and spiritual forehead and
the practical organ of nutrition; and if we take into consideration its
natural function as the organ of smell it is rightly placed in this
intermediate position between an attitude to the external world
which is either wholly practical or ideal. No doubt the sense of smell
in such a position is still associated with an animal want; it is
intimately connected with the taste; and for this reason, in the case
of the mere animal, the snout is at the service of the mouth and the
organ of nourishment. But the sense of smell is by itself as a fact no
actual consumption of objects, as eating and tasting are; it merely
accepts the result of the process in which the objects pass into the
atmosphere and its invisible and mysterious medium of dissolution.
Assuming, then, that the passage from forehead and nose is of such
a formation that the forehead viewed independently arches forward,
and yet in relation to the nose retreats, whereas this latter organ on
its part, in proximity to the forehead, is withdrawn back and only
projects beyond this point, we see that both these portions of the
face—that is, the contemplative part, the forehead, and that which
suggests a practical use, with which we may associate the mouth,
form an emphatic contrast, in virtue of which the nose, as belonging
in a sense to both extremes, appertains equally to the practical
aims[158] of the mouth. Furthermore, the forehead, in its isolated
position, receives the appearance of severity and exclusive spiritual
concentration in its contrast to the eloquent sympathy of the mouth,
which is primarily the organ of nutritive support, and at the same
time accepts the nasal organ into its service as its instrument in
creating the natural want by virtue of its smell, and thereby declares
its direct relation to the material side. And in close connection with
this reciprocity is the contingent character of the form to the
indeterminable modifications of which both nose and forehead may
be carried. The particular type of the forehead's arch, the nature of
its projection or retreat, loses its secure lines of definition, and the
nose can be fiat or fine, drooping, arched, more acutely flattened
and a snub.
By virtue of amelioration[159] and accommodation, however, that
beautiful harmony, which the Greek profile asserts in the gentle and
uninterrupted communication between the spiritual forehead and the
nose, that is, between the upper and lower portions of the face, the
nose appears on this very account of closer affinity to the forehead,
and consequently receives itself a spiritual expression and character
as though drawn up into the spiritual system. The sense of smell
becomes at the same time a sense independent of purely practical
ends, a nose refined for spiritual purpose; just as in fact also the
nose by its sneer and similar movements, however unimportant by
themselves they may be, is nevertheless shown to be in the highest
degree pliable as a mode of expressing the judgments and emotions
of soul-life. So, for example, we say of a proud man that he holds
his nose high, or ascribe sauciness to a young girl who tosses up her
bit of a nose.
And the same thing may be said of the mouth. No doubt it is on the
one hand referable as an instrument to the satisfaction of hunger
and thirst; it expresses, however, in addition to this conditions of the
soul, opinions, and passions. Even among animals it is used in this
relation as the organ of animal cries, and by man as that of speech,
laughter, sighs, and so forth, by which means the lineaments of the
mouth are themselves associated with the facts of eloquent soul-
sympathy, or of joy, sorrow, and similar conditions.
It is no doubt asserted that, though for the Greeks, such a
configuration of the human countenance is presented as the true
presentation of beauty, the Chinese, Jews, and Egyptians, regarded
on the contrary an entirely different type, or rather forms absolutely
in conflict with such, as equally beautiful, or yet more beautiful, and
the conclusion is made that, cancelling one example by another, we
have not proved that the Greek profile is the type of genuine beauty.
Such a statement, however, is wholly superficial. The Greek profile
must in fact not be regarded as any mere external and accidental
form, but approximates to the ideal of beauty by its independent
claims, namely, first, because it is the type of countenance in which
the expression of soul-life forces into the background all that is
purely material, and, secondly, because it to the fullest extent
detaches itself from all that is contingent in the form, without,
however, displaying thereby mere subservience to rule, and leaving
no place for every kind of individuality.
(β) With respect to specific types and their closer consideration I will
merely touch upon certain fundamental aspects selected from the
abundant material which otherwise invites attention. In this respect
we may in the first instance refer to the forehead, the eye, and the
ear, as those parts of the face which are most nearly related to the
contemplative, or at least spiritual aspect, and, secondly, to the
nose, mouth, and chin, as those relatively speaking more connected
with the organs of practical import.
Thirdly, we shall have somewhat to say of the hair as the external
setting, by virtue of which the head is rounded off in an oval shape
of beauty.
(αα) The forehead is in the ideal form of classical sculpture, neither
fully arched forward, nor as a rule lofty; for, although the spiritual
aspect has to be prominently emphasized in its configuration of the
visual features, yet it is not as yet spirituality simply as such, which
sculpture has to present before us, but rather individuality as still
exclusively expressed in bodily form.
In heads of Hercules, for example, the forehead is preferably low, for
the reason that Hercules possesses rather the muscular vigour of the
body directed towards external objects than the introspective energy
of mind. And for the rest we find the forehead subject to many
modifications, lower in the case of charming and youthful feminine
forms, and more lofty in the case of figures that represent
substantial character and serious reflection.
In speaking of the eye it is important at once to make it clear that in
the figure of ideal sculpture, in addition to the absence of any true
colour such as is found in painting, the glance of the eye is also
absent. It is possible no doubt to show on historical evidence that
the ancients, in the case of particular images of Minerva and other
gods placed in temples, have painted the eye, since we find actual
traces of colour in certain statues; in the case of images dedicated to
a sacred purpose, however, artists have frequently held fast so far as
possible to traditional usage in the face of good taste. In the case of
other examples it is clear that they must have possessed eyes in the
shape of precious stones inserted. This practice, however, is the
result of a desire already adverted to of adorning the images of gods
in as rich and lavish a manner as possible. And we may affirm
generally that such either mark the beginnings of the art, or are due,
as exceptions, to the traditions of religion. Moreover, apart from this,
mere colour is still far from giving to the eye the essentially
concentrated look, which alone communicates to it an expression
that is wholly complete. We may therefore here assume it as a fact
that in the case of statues and busts of a truly classical type,
unaffected by such exceptional conditions which have come down to
us from antiquity, the light focus of the eye, no less than the spiritual
expression of its glance, is absent. For although not unfrequently the
focus is inserted in the apple of the eye, or at least is indicated by a
conical depression, and a modification which expresses the light
point of this focus and by this means a kind of visual glance, such
remains nevertheless the purely external configuration of the eye-
ball, and is no presentation of its vitality; in other words it is not the
glance of it simply, the inward glance, that is, of the soul.
We can readily imagine that it must cost the artist a great deal to
sacrifice the eye in its simple aspect of animation. We have only to
look a man in the eyes to discover a point of arrest, a centre that
explains and is basic to his entire presentment, which we may grasp
in its simplest terms from the unifying declaration of its bare look.
The eye-glance is in fact that aspect which is most steeped in soul; it
is the concentration of the inward life and its subjective emotion.
Just as a man by means of a handshake, so, too, with yet more
rapidity he is brought into unity with his fellow by virtue of the eye-
glance he faces. And it is this pre-eminently spiritual mode of
revelation which sculpture is forced to dispense with. In painting, on
the contrary, this outward expression of soul-life makes its
appearance by means of the subtle gradations of colouring either in
its entire spiritual effect, or in a manifest association with external
facts and the particular interests, feelings, and passions, which are
called up by their presence. But the province of the sculptor in his
art is neither the essential inwardness of soul-life, the concentration
of the entire man in the simple centre of self-identity, which gleams
out in the human glance as its ultimate point of illumination, nor the
developed subjectivity as we find it diffused amid the surrounding
world. The end of sculpture is the totality of the external form, into
which the soul must disintegrate itself, and present itself by means
of the manifold of the medium thus utilized, so that the recourse to
one simple soul-focus, in other word the immediacy of the spirit-
glance, is not here permitted. The work of sculpture possesses no
such ideal intimacy in its simplest terms which is allowed to assert
itself, as the human look does assert itself in contrast to other parts
of the human body, thereby unfolding a contrast between the eye
and the body; rather in sculpture what the individual is in his ideal
and spiritual significance remains wholly fused in the total aspect of
form, which the spirit that contemplates it, the spectator, can alone
grasp in its unity. And in the second place, and with equal truth the
eye peers into the world that surrounds it; it necessarily looks at
something positive, and thereby is witness to man in his relation to a
manifold world of objects, just as in the sphere of feeling he is
united to his environment and general experience. It is, however,
precisely this union with external objects from which the true figure
of sculpture is withdrawn, being rather absorbed in what is
substantive in its own spiritual content, essentially self-subsistent,
that is without further diffusion or development. Thirdly, the glance
of the eye receives its fully evolved significance by virtue of the
expression of the rest of the bodily presentment, such as in its
general mien and speech, albeit as the purely formal point of
subjective life, in which the entire manifold of the form and its
environment is concentrated to a focus, it holds itself aloof and
contrasted with this development. A breadth of vision of this specific
kind is, however, foreign to the plastic art. For this reason the more
specialized mode of expression in the human vision, which did not at
the same time immediately discover its further reciprocal response of
effect in the entire compass of its configuration, could only be an
accidental particularity, which the sculptured figure must dispense
with. For reasons such as these, sculpture does not merely deprive
itself of nothing when it leaves its figures bare of the eye's full
glance; but we may affirm that it is only true to its fundamental
principle when it totally disregards this mode of the soul's
expression. Consequently it is merely one more example of the fine
insight of antiquity, that it recognized firmly this limitation and
restriction of sculpture, and remained loyal to the abstract view it
implied. It is an evidence of the lofty intelligence of the ancients,
based on the fulness of their reasoning faculties, and the
comprehensive grasp of their outlook. No doubt we do meet with
cases in antique sculpture, in which the eyes gaze upon some
definite point, as for example in the case of the faun we have
alluded to several times who glances at the young Bacchus. This
smile of recognition is expressed in a moving way; but even here the
eye is itself visionless, and the real statues of the gods in their
simple situations are not presented to us in relations of this specific
character so far as the direction of eye and glance is concerned.
With regard to the form of the eye in ideal sculpture it is large of
size, widely extended, oval and in respect to position placed at right
angles toward the line of the forehead and nose, and in considerable
depression. As far back as Winckelmann[160] the large size of the
eye was accounted significant of beauty, just as a great light is more
beautiful than a small one. "The size, however," his description
continues, "is relative to the bone of the eye or its cavity, and is
expressed in the mode of incision[161] and in the opening of the
eyelids, of which in beautiful eyes the upper describes a more
circular arch toward the angle within than the lower one." In the
case of profile heads of superior workmanship the apple of the eye
itself possesses a profile and receives precisely by virtue of this
opening thus cut away a nobility and a free glance, whose very light,
according to Winckelmann's observation, is rendered visible on coins
through an exalted point or focus on the apple of the eye. At the
same time mere size does not make all eyes beautiful; they are this
in the first place by virtue of the cast of the eyelids, and in the
second through being themselves deepset. In other words the eye
ought not to press forward, and by so doing be thrust on the
external world, for it is just this close relation to the external world
which is removed from the ideal, exchanging for this the self-
retirement of personality upon its own resources, that is, upon what
is ideally substantive in the individuality. The projection of the eye,
however, also suggests the thought that the apple of the eye is at
one time pushed to the fore and at another withdrawn, and,
particularly in the case of the staring gaze, only testifies to the fact
that the individual is beside himself, either staring in total absence of
thought, or in an equally soulless way absorbed in the gaze upon
some material object. In the Ideal of antique sculpture the eye is
placed in even more pronounced retreat than we actually find it in
Nature. Winckelmann suggests as a reason for this that in the case
of statues of larger size which are placed more remote from the
vision of the spectator, without this more receding position, on
account of the fact that apart from this the apple of the eye was for
the most part flat, the eye itself would have been without meaning
and practically lifeless, if by just this more emphatic projection of the
bone of the eye-socket, the thereby accentuated play of light and
shadow had not made the eye more apparently active. Yet this
deepening of the eye has a yet further significance. In other words,
if the forehead is thereby suffered to receive a prominence superior
to that of Nature the contemplative portion of the face is the
predominant factor, and we receive a keener sense of spiritual
expression, while also the emphasized shadow in the eye-sockets on
its own account enables us to feel a depth and unimpaired
inwardness, a look that is shut off from external objects, and retires
on the essential presence of individuality, whose depths are suffused
over the entire presentment. In the case of coins, too, of the best
period the eyes are deep-set, and the enclosing bones of the eye are
projected. The eye-brows on the contrary are not expressed by a
more extended arch of tiny hairs, but merely suggested by means of
the acute sharpness of the eye-bone ridge, which, without
interrupting the forehead in its form of continuity as eye-brows
actually do through their colour and relative elevation, surround the
eyes as with an elliptical garland. The more elevated and
consequently more independent arch of the eye-brows has never
been regarded as beautiful.
Winckelmann[162] further observes with regard to the ears that the
ancients devoted the greatest care to their elaboration, so that in the
case of cut stones indifferent attention to the execution of the ear is
an infallible sign of the spuriousness of the work in question. In
particular he insists that statues which are portraits often reproduced
the characteristic and individual type of the ear. It is consequently
possible in many cases to ascertain the very personality represented
from the ear, if the same happens to be known, and to take one
example, from a single ear with an exceptionally large opening into
it, to deduce the presence of a Marcus Aurelius. Indeed, the ancients
have not failed to indicate in this respect what is actually misshapen.
As examples of a peculiar type of ear to be found in ideal heads,
Winckelmann draws attention to certain ears given to Hercules,
which are beaten out flat, and others which bulge out in their
cartilaginous folds. They indicate wrestlers and pancratiasts, just as
Hercules himself carried off the prize at Elis as a pancratiast in the
games of Pelops.
(ββ) We have still to add some remarks with reference to that part
of the countenance which is more nearly related to the practical or
sensuous side of natural function, in other words the specific form of
the nose, the mouth, and the chin. The distinction in the form of the
nose gives to the face a variety of configuration and many various
kinds of expression. A keenly cut nose with thin folds[163] at the
apertures we are accustomed to associate with an acute
understanding, whereas a broad and drooping one, or a snub nose
that is somewhat brutish, suggests as a rule sensuality, folly, and
bestiality. It is, however, the function of sculpture to hold itself aloof,
not merely from such extremes, but also the intermediate stages of
design and expression, and refuse consequently to accept, as we
have already seen is the case with the Greek profile, not simply the
separation from the forehead, but also the extreme curve, whether
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

testbankdeal.com