THE PRINCIPLE OF HOPE

Page 812
All this prevents the beautiful from being calmly received and enjoyed. Wanting is already presupposed in the reception, so that the latter can be one concerning man.
Entertaining people and feeding a fire, both can and must be related. The moved will could be removed least of all from shaping itself, from the production of the
beautiful. Thus even from the standpoint of the pathos of creation, that inscribed in the bourgeois world from the beginning, the differently bourgeois, i.e. the formal
pleasure of contemplation was frustrated. Art appeared from this angle particularly as active reworking, one which definitely expanded and essentially increased the
world. Thus, as we have seen, the French revolutionary architect Ledoux even called the builder a rival of God. And long before that the humanist Scaliger took the
word poetry in the both literal and Promethean sense of ποιεìν: the poet is ‘factor’, indeed ‘alter deus’. So that Scaliger himself defined the poet as someone who does
not retell what already exists like an actor, but creates and founds like another God: ‘Videtur poeta sane res ipsas non ut aliae artes, quasi histrio, narrare, sed velut
alter deus condere.’ This Prometheus metaphor of the artist ran from 1561 on, the Faust period in which Scaliger's poetics appeared, through Bacon and Shaftesbury,
to Klopstock, to the Sturm und Drang, to Herder and the young Goethe: a classification based on will throughout; a classification based on genius, in which the courage
for the creator spiritus appears, but no sedative of a pure, receptive­contemplative world­eye, as in the later classical definition. Thus ‘freedom in appearance’, even
from the production side, does not become illusion but object­based essentiation of what is portrayed in the sense of deep human closeness, to which art in its way
leads and brings the world. In its way: in the stated way of aesthetic pre­appearance, whereby essential material which has not yet emerged but is treated without any
illusion as having emerged and existing is carried such an important step towards being born and existing. So even from this standpoint no formalism exists for which its
autarkical perfection of form is the sole perfection. The landscape of hope, even in the terrifying vision, is rather the aesthetic omega: Hegel called this, in objectiveidealistic
fashion, infinity in the finite, here it is called, in utopian­realistic fashion, human identity in the other, in the driving alteritas. This is the same as the goal­definition
by virtue of the symbol, in contrast to the allegory which as identity relation in the other, expressed by what is other, is a path­definition. Art in its path is thus just as
thoroughly allegorical as, with regard to the goal governing the path (with regard to unity and universality, which is ultimately only one in so far as it is humane), it
remains indebted