255
«The art through which this temper is expressed will, in all probability, be refined and sensual, — therefore also, assuredly feeble (…) It will be entirely deficient in expression of character, and acuteness of thought, but will be peculiarly restless, manifesting its desire for excitement in idle changes of subject and purpose. Incapable of true imagination, it will seek to supply its place by exaggerations, incoherencies, and monstrosities; and the form of grotesque to which it gives rise will be an incongruous chain of hackneyed graces (…) prettinesses or sublimities, not of its own invention, associated in forms which be absurd without being fantastic, and monstrous without being terrible (…) There are infinite ranks and kinds of this grotesque, according to the natural power of the minds which originate it, and to the degree in which they have lost themselves» (135–136).
256
«The true grotesque being the expression of the repose or play of a
257
«Не sees (…) misery and wrath, and discordance, and danger, and all the work of the dragon and his angels; this he sees with too deep feeling to forget (…) and as the bright colors mingle beneath his touch, and the fair leaves and flowers grow at his bidding, strange horrors and phantasms rise by their side; grisly beasts and venomous serpents, and spectral fiends and nameless inconsistencies of ghastly life, rising out of things most beautiful, and fading back into them again, as the harm and the horror of life do out of its happiness. He has seen these things, he wars with them daily; he cannot but give them their part in his work (…) He is but carving and gilding, and must not turn aside to weep; but he knows that hell is burning on, for all that, and the smoke of it withers his oak-leaves» (142).
258
«.. various forms of transition which exist between the two extremes of great and base in the satirical grotesque (…) impurity and malice stealing gradually into the nobler forms, and invention and wit elevating the lower, according to the countless minglings of the elements of the human soul» (150).
259
«This thrill of mingled doubt, fear and curiosity lies at the very root of the delight which mankind takes in symbolism» (154).
260
«Теперь мы видим как бы сквозь тусклое стекло, гадательно, тогда же лицем к лицу; теперь знаю я отчасти, а тогда позн&ю, подобно как я познан» (1 Кор 13 12).
261
«It was not an accidental necessity for the conveyance of truth by pictures instead of words, which led to its [symbolism's] universal adoption wherever art was on the advance; but the Divine fear which necesserily follows on the understanding that a thing is other and greater than it seems; and which, it appears probable, has been rendered peculiarly attractive to the human heart, because God would have us understand that this is true not of invented symbols merely, but of all things amidst which we live; that there is a deeper meaning within them than eye hath seen, or ear hath heard; and that the whole visible creation is a mere perishable symbol of things eternal and true (…) Once the symbolic language was familiarized to the mind (…) there was no form so mean, no incident so commonplace, but, if regarded in this light, it might become sublime» (155–156).
262
«There is very little architecture in the world which is, in the full sense of the words, good and noble. A few pieces of Italian Gothic and Romanesque, a few scattered fragments of Gothic cathedrals, and perhaps two or three of Greek temples, are all that we possess approaching to the ideal of perfection. All the rest — Egyptian, Norman, Arabian, and most Gothic, and, which is very noticeable, for the most part all the strongest and mightiest — depend for their — depend for their power on some development of the grotesque spirit…» (133).
263
Ср., например, понимание Петером Бюргером в его книге «Theorie der Avantgarde» постсимволизма в качестве критики, направленной в адрес эстетического мировоззрения как такового (Burger 1974:8 ff).
264
Легитимируя себя интердискурсивно — посредством опоры на смежные ряды символико-когнитивной деятельности (на философию, политическую речь, науку и т. д.), эстетическое постоянно покидает собственные пределы. Отсюда остранение и оказывается одним из главных его признаков. В постсимволизме произошло нечто вроде остранения самого остранения (произведение искусства здесь ставит вопрос, почему оно является таковым, как об этом писал Артур Данто (Danto 1936:35). Поднявшись на ступень авторефлексии, остранение сделалось доступным для научного обсуждения, развязанного формалистами (см. подробно: Hansen-Love 1978: passim).
