Mais lart atteint un but quil na pas.
Above all by the light translucence of the Eternal through and in the Temporal.
One way of responding to the notion of a religion of art is light simply to reject the analogy, as Eliot did.7, the question of form and figure, of old forms and new sake figures, lies at the heart of the problem.But the phrase is really sake a French distillation of ideas loosely taken from Kant and Schiller that became hardened and dogmatised in the literary-cultural wars of the 1820s and 30s sake in Paris.Thus the Poetic Principle lies, strictly and simply, in human aspiration towards a superior Beauty, and the manifestation of that principle is in an enthusiasm, an excitement of the soul.Théophile Gautier was complaining as early as 1847 in an article in the Revue des Deux Mondes that the motto could be reduced simplistically to mean la forme pour la forme, le moyen pour le moyen (form for forms sake, means light for means sake) (qtd.If ever there was a striking instance of that union, it is in the countenance before.In the positive sake sense, it denotes a kind of blitheness or repose ( Renaissance 142) in Winckelmann and his followers, an Hellenic ideal again with its roots in German Romanticism, and with Schlegels notion of the classical Greek world as one in which man was.Edu uses cookies to personalize content, tailor ads and improve the user experience.There is semiotic uncertainty of the opposite kind also at issue, the possibility of discerning a different thing under the same name, a new thing under religion, martyrdom, callinga new thing under Art.Elsewhere Pater had praised the quality of unconcern in the handling of abstract questions, something he had felt was missing in Coleridges writing.



In Pater and sake Rossetti, then, we sake have two very different examples of episode the ways in which the religion of art came sake to have meaning in the nineteenth century, two distinct directions in which the phenomenon may be pursued.
19 Late Romantic thinking, especially in aestheticism and netware symbolism, is engrossed in the problem of the secularisation of the Symbol, taking traditional ideas of the universe as inherently numinousor, in Professor Teufelsdröckhs phrase, one vast Symbol of God ( Sartor Resartus 166)and then submitting them.
Mathew Arnold star 113-14, nothing in this world or the next betrays a serious irritation with Matthew Arnolds humanism, the subject of the Harvard lecture, an irritation that had also been evident in the earlier, better known essay Arnold and Pater (1930).
The non-religious artist, it would seem, even one as priestly as Henry James, is condemned to use religious language only metaphorically, or in a debased form, however much he (or his characters) sacrifice to Art.To ask of poetry that it give religious and philosophic satisfaction, while deprecating philosophy and dogmatic religion, is of course to embrace the shadow of a shade.The faith of the artist, artistic sacrifice, martyrdom, witness, belief, the false or insincere belief (the hypocrisy) of the artist-phariseethese are all recognisably Jamesian subjects.22 At the same time, the religion of art refused to let go of the spiritual sweetness it perceived as the perfume of the type, insisting upon the union of the sensuous with the supersensuous.For Newman the poetry was both a conscious and an unconscious matter, drawing upon feeling.Twenty three years earlier, Rossettis prose piece Hand and Soul had appeared in the first issue of The Germ.Longing, a chastened temper, spiritual joy, system are precious states of mind, not because they are part of mans duty or because God has commanded them, still less because they are means of obtaining a reward, but because like culture itself they are remote, refined, intense.There, Eliot described the way in which literature, or Culture, tended with Arnold to usurp the place of religion.



The Church was itself the most sacred and venerable of poets (Newman, Dublin Review 452-3).
We might call this de-Christianised consubstantiality, or incarnation as a light for art sake pdf kind of literalism, or, in a most basic sense, the tautology of the body.
In other words, it suggests a form of substitution of the kind Eliot denied; it involves an interpenetration of art and religion, an exchange, in which it is simply impossible to extrude Rossettis aesthetic from the religious forms through which it manifests itself, even.