On the pathetic

The exhibition of suffering as mere suffering has never once been the purpose of Art; however, as a means to its end, suffering is extremely important to Art. The final purpose of Art is the exhibition of metaphysics and the tragic art, in particular, sees to it that Art embodies for us, under the condition of affect, the moral independence of natural laws. Only the resistance which the affect manifests against the power of feelings, makes the free principles acting in us recognizable; resistance, however, can only be evaluated according to the strengths of the assails. Should intelligence reveal itself in the human being, that is, as a force independent from Nature, hence, Nature must have proven its whole might, first, before our eyes.
The reasonable creature
i.        Must suffer deeply and violently; Pathos must be there in order to allow the reasonable creature to show his independence and exhibit himself as an active person.
ii.        People can never know in one person, if the mental setting is an effect of his moral force, when people are not convinced that it is not an effect of insensitivity. It is not so much an art to become master over one�s own feelings since they only spread lightly and fugitively on the surface of the soul; however, to keep one�s freedom of mind in a stormy situation which agitates the whole sensible nature, in that category belongs a capacity of resistance which, beyond all the power of Nature, is infinitely transcendent. One succeeded, hence, to the exhibition of the moral freedom only through the liveliest exhibition of the suffering Nature and the tragic hero must, first, have legitimated himself to us as a sensitive character before we pay homage to him as a reasonable character and believe in his spiritual forces.
Pathos is, hence, the first and foremost demand on the tragic artist and it is allowed him to perform the exhibition of suffering extensively so it can take place without impairing its final purpose, without oppressing moral freedom. He must, at the same time, give to his heroes or his readers the complete load of suffering because it would remain, otherwise, always problematic whether his resistance against the same suffering is an action of the mind and is something positive but is not rather more only something negative and a shortcoming.
The second case is happening in the drama of the former French writers where we seldom or never receive supremely the suffering Nature in the face but rather see mostly only the cold, declaiming poets or also the stilted comedians. The icy tone of the declamation suffocates any true Nature and it makes completely impossible to the French tragedians, in their treasured decency, to show Humanity in its truth.
Decency distorts everywhere, even if it is at its right place, the expression of Nature and hence, this expression demands, at once, skilfulness. We can hardly believe from a French dramatic hero that he suffers, for he allows himself to be set outside his mental condition as the calmest man and the unceasing consideration for the impression which he makes on others, allows him never, the Nature in himself to release its freedom.
The kings, princesses and heroes of Corneille and Voltaire never forget their ranks even in the most violent suffering and shove away their Humanity as well as their dignity. They are identical to the kings, the emperors in the old image books who keep their crown even during rest. How differently are the Greeks and the poets of the new civilizations who, in their spirit, have written poetry! The Greek never shamed Nature, he allowed sensibility to have its full rights and therefore, is sure that he will never be subjected to it. His deep and rightful intelligence allows him to differentiate the arbitrary which bad taste makes as its main duty, from the necessary; however, everything that is not Humanity, is arbitrary to the human being.

The Greek artist who has to exhibit a Laokoon, a Niobe, a Philoctet, does not know anything about a princess, a king or a prince; he sticks only to the human being. For that reason, the wise sculptor gets rid of the shroud and shows us, bluntly, the naked subjects, even if he knows very well, that this, in real life was not the case. Clothes are to him something fortuitous, to which necessity may never once be applied and the rules of decency or need are not the rules of Art. The sculptor should and will show us the human being while gowns will hide him; hence, he gets rid of them rightfully.

This excerpt is 771 word long. The text is 9 579 words. If you if wish to read more excerpts please send a request to [email protected].

Author's Note

copy and paste the passage that is not clear to you