THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE ARTS 43 1 



distinguish the one from the other. In nature all is useful, all is 

 beautiful."' 1 



We submit, then, that the commonly accepted classification of the 

 arts is an arbitrary one. Its foundation, the supposedly ignoble char- 

 acter of productive labor, is a false idea. Labor, not leisure, is the real 

 badge of dignity. ' The stone which the builders refused is become 

 the headstone of the corner.' Hence the old classification of the arts, 

 a classification which tends to disparage labor, is an anachronism, and 

 an impertinence. It is, in a way, a gratuitous reflection upon the 

 laboring class. 



Before proceeding to reclassify the arts, let us carefully define the 

 scope of art. The word art usually suggests the fine arts. " ' Work 

 of art ' to most people," says Huxley, " means a picture, a statue, or a 

 piece of bijouterie ; by way of compensation ' artist ' has included in 

 its wide embrace cooks and ballet girls, no less than painters and sculp- 

 tors." 2 The word art properly includes ' all the works of man's hands, 

 from a flint implement to a cathedral or a chronometer.' It embraces 

 all phenomena in which intelligence plays the part of conscious and 

 immediate cause. The supplement of art is nature. Art includes 

 everything not embraced by nature. 



The field of the arts being thus defined, we may now construct our 

 classification. 



All arts are alike in this — their medium is matter. No art can free 

 itself wholly from material things. Some arts, as music and poetry, 

 may seem to do so, for the ideal elements of these arts predominate to 

 such an extent that we forget the material by which they are made 

 manifest — writing and printing materials, musical instruments and 

 sound waves. No matter how idealistic an art may be, it must still 

 deal with matter. 



This being the case, a logical classification of the arts may be based 

 upon a classification of material phenomena. And if this latter is an 

 evolutionary classification, that is, if it proceeds from the simple to the 

 complex, the resulting classification of the arts will be in the order of 

 complexity and potential utility. It will also be a classification in 

 which each art will be a means to those above it, that is, a classification 

 of superiority and subordination. 



Now one of the most obvious divisions of the material world is into 

 the inorganic, the organic and the superorganic. From the standpoint 

 of evolution these divisions rank in the order named — the organic is 

 higher than the inorganic, and the superorganic higher than the or- 

 ganic. Each division furnishes the material upon which is exercised 



1 ' Essays,' First Series, Essay XII., Art. 



1 ' Evolution and Ethics, and Other Essays,' authorized edition, New York, 

 1899, p. 10, foot-note. 



