BENEDETTO CROCE.*
Mg. BALFOUR in his recent Romanes Lecture mentioned with respect the work on aesthetic of the Italian philosopher, Signor Croce, as giving more practical guidance to the inquirer than the ordinary absolutist aesthetics. The trans- lation which Mr. Douglas Ainslie has given us of Croce's chief work comes opportunely when our doubts have been stirred by Mr. Balfour's scepticism. Mr. Ainslie translates the whole of the Theory of Aesthetic, and in a very useful " Historical Summary" gives a synopsis of the historical portion of the original. The translator is an enthusiast for his subject, as is evident from the introduction, but on the whole we do not think he makes extravagant claims for Croce. This Aesthetic is really a most remarkable performance, and an English translation is a real boon. In future editions Mr. Ainslie would be well advised to revise certain portions of his work, where the English is inelegant and obscure. Croce is not the easiest of thinkers, and a vague phrase may turn the reader on to the wrong track.
Croce begins with a psychological analysis. There are two activities, he says, very much in the words of the Romanes Lecture, the theoretical and the practical. In each activity there are two degrees, the second of which implies the first. In the theoretical we have first the aesthetic intuition of the phenomenon, and second the logical or conceptual knowledge of the noumenon; while in the practical activity we have the economic activity which wills the phenomenon, and second, the moral activity which wills the noumenon. One-might criticise this analysis on several grounds ; but, after all, the real importance of such dis- tinctions lies in the use which is made of them, so we may pass to Croce's constructive theory of aesthetic. Every human being, he says, has intuitions of reality, and art is the adequate expression of such intuitions. The tramp and the poet alike have intuitions of an autumn sunset, but the poet alone has the adequate expression. Now expression is complete in the soul of the artist long before it is com- municated to the world. The statue is complete in the sculptor's brain ; the rest is only the "externalising of the impression." Beauty on such a theory can only mean one thing, adequacy of expression. The beautiful is the com- pletely expressive, the ugly the incompletely expressive. Signor Croce surveys a vast number of critical terms, such as the " sublime," the " heroic," &c., and relegates most of them to what he calls " the astrology of aesthetic." So far as they have any meaning, it is merely psychological. They represent distinctions in the raw material of intuitions—but such distinctions have no aesthetic value. One thing in the
•
• Aesthetic : as Science of Expression eincl•GenoraL Linguistic. Translated from the Italian of Benedetto Croce by Douglas Ainslie, London: Macmillan and CO. Dos. net.]
manifold of sense impressions has no aesthetic superiority over another. It is only in the expression that we find aesthetic failure or success.
An artist may will or may decline to communicate his expression of his intuitions to the world. The communication, according to Signor Croce, in no way increases their aesthetic value, it only enables us to appreciate them. If he does resolve to give the world the benefit of his art, then he has to adopt one or other of the numerous techniques, or media of communication. Signor Croce seems to hold that if the expression be perfect in the artist's mind there can be no technical failure in externalising it. This seems to be true for such arts as literature and music, but it needs qualification for those like sculpture or painting, where a certain manual dexterity or craftsmanship is postulated. Be this as it may, there can be no question about the value of Signor Croce's
general theory of externalisation. To externalise an artistic expression is to provide in proper conditions a stimulus to the reproduction of the same expression. To quote our author- " The complete process of aesthetic production can be sym- bolised in four steps, which are : a, impressions ; b, expression, or spiritual aesthetic synthesis ; c, hedonistic accompaniment, or pleasure of the beautiful (aesthetic pleasure) ; d, translation of the aesthetic fact into physical phenomena (sounds, tones, move- ments, combinations of lines and colours, etc.)"
This is the formula for the work of art, but stages a and b are the only ones with which pure aesthetic is concerned. It follows from this theory of aesthetic that art as a spiritual activity is absolutely free. Its sole aim is the adequate expression of a datum, the intuitions which the world supplies. Its sole test and model lies within itself, the adequacy of expression to impression. Hence, says Signor Croce, in a true sense there is an absolute standard of beauty, but it is a standard which lies within the aesthetic activity. The expression is adequate or it is not adequate ; but this adequacy, while an absolute canon, exists only for each work of art as an individual, and cannot be generalised into an external standard. Nor have ethics, religion, politics, any
thing to do with aesthetic value. Signor Croce is modest and wise in what he claims for art, but he is none the less inexorable. As soon as a work of art is externalised it becomes a practical fact, and is open legitimately to the criticism of the moralist, the publicist, and the philosopher. Indeed, no aesthetic philosopher of our acquaintance emphasises so strongly the legitimacy of the moral criteria in arts when properly applied. We may comment upon its moral teaching or its political bearing; we may compare it with other works of a similar type, classify it under a school, or estimate its relative importance, in which case we are performing the work of the historian. But all these comments have nothing to do with aesthetic criticism. For it the one question is, Is the expression adequate to the intention P
If Signor Croce's argument be correct, we get a new mean- ing for the critical function. The duty of a critic of aesthetic is to act as an additional "stimulus to reproduction." He must re-create the conditions under which the artist worked in order that the spectator, by recapturing the true environs ment, may be able to realise the true meaning. His business is to interpret and to expound, and to judge, when judgment is necessary, by the single canon of adequate expression. Now this doctrine of the critic's duty, which Signor Croce reaches by way of a theory of aesthetic, is being more and more recognised as the only defensible one. It is the only one which explains the practice of the greatest masters, from Coleridge to Pater. A critic on this view is the creative artist, who lacks somehow the will or the ability to externalise his impressions. " The judicial activity," says Croce, " which criticizes and recognizes the beautiful, is identical with that which produces it. The only difference lies in the diversity of circumstances, since in the one case it is a question of aesthetic production, in the other of repro. duction." The merit of the Crocean view is that it gives to criticism an intelligible and clearly defined function, and while separating the aesthetic aspect sharply from other con- siderations, makes no extravagant claims for aesthetic as compared with other branches of thought. Such merits are all too rare in the philosophy of art, and they will, we trust, ensure for Signor Croce's work the most serious consideration.
Previous page
