Assignment 4 - George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Aesthetics class

Kerry Keith Murdock

He introduces the concept with 3 steps, which are as follows: 1. Actual art comes only from man and not from nature. It cannot be naturally produced. 2. Not only is it created by man but it is also created for man with some type of medium which is intended to stimulate his senses. This is intended to arouse a feeling or feelings in the intended audience. 3. Actual art must have a purpose, or, as he called it, an ‘end.’ However, although as outlined in Step 2 it must evoke an emotion it must be accomplished unintentionally. It must serve a purpose but must arrive at said purpose almost by accident.

            While these definitions fall well under the categories of some types of art, including dancing, music, martial arts, and perhaps gymnastics it does not include all realms of what is now considered ‘art’ in our modern day. Both theatrical performances, such as the professional performances on Broadway, and also the film industry, where such celebrity’s performances are highlighted at the Oscars, are included.

            To further argue this case would be the example of a panoramic vista setting, such as the Grand Canyon, whose majestically sweeping location draws artists, photographers, painters, film crews, and spectators from around the globe on a regular basis. Many even come to try and desperately capture its power and majesty on film, canvas, or paper. If it contains the awe and beauty as described by other philosophers then how come people are drawn to it like flies to honey? I believe it would be safe to say that the Grand Canyon has pulled in more visitors in its lifetime than any art museum has had in its lifetime. According to his definition this marvelous feat can only fall under the description of ‘art’ if someone were to place a mounted frame alongside one of its viewing areas.

            Along these same lines, gardeners and even home owners enter their naturally grown but hand-treated gardens, flowerbeds, vegetables, fruits, and even livestock into aggressive competitions to see ‘who’s is the best.’ Yet each of these would argue that theirs is a work of art, although no brush, pen, camera, or computer graphic tool was put into place.

            Plus, his descriptive definition is limited to mortal man alone and does not include that All-Powerful Creator who made such things of beauty that we are trying to emulate. As the Original creator of all things, are His hands not the foundation of what is art and beauty? Is it not His hands we are trying to copy? So, how can we not consider his Works to be art?

In conclusion, whether created by hand, song, movement, imagination, camera, or computer I would argue that ‘art’ is anything that touches or speaks to our soul. In this regard anything can be categorized as art if it enlightens, strengthens, or speaks to us, however trivial or grand it may be.