B E A 



115 



B E A 



and is such that the mind dwells on it u-ith pleasure. 

 Hence the form of the antelope, the swan, or the tiger, is 

 considered beautiful, because we take a satisfaction in con- 

 templating the movements which those forms are admirably 

 fitted to produce : but the form of the pis:'s snout is not 

 considered beautiful, because the mind flies with disgust 

 from the filthy purposes for which that animal employs it. 

 So likewise we call the outward form of the arms, legs, neck, 

 &c., of the human figure beautiful, when their form is suited 

 to their respective uses ; but no one finds any beauty in the 

 form of the human stomach, or intestines, or liver, though 

 equally well fitted for their several ends, because they sug- 

 gest the notion of processes which men do not willingly 

 contemplate. (Burke's Sublime and Beautiful, part iii. 

 s. 68.) 



Perhaps, in strictness, it might be thought that the 

 simple emotion derived from the colour of objects is alone 

 properly entitled to be considered as the feeling of beauty ; 

 and that the beauty of form in any object, derived from a 

 sense of its fitness to its end, is only a pleasing association, 

 allied indeed to the feeling of beauty by a close analogy, 

 but still distinct from it. This question (which in fact is 

 merely verbal) we have not sufficient space to discuss at 

 length ; nevertheless it appears to us that all ages and na- 

 tions have agreed in speaking of the beauty o[fnrm as well 

 as of colour, and that we are justified in considering as 

 included in the feeling of beauty those emotions which are 

 susceptible o analysis, as well as those which are not. 



Having made these general remarks, we will proceed to 

 explain, with somewhat more detail, the application of the 

 principles last stated. 



The beauty of form, arising from a perception of utility, 

 or of fitness of certain means to produce a certain end, may 

 be observed both in animate and inanimate objects in the 

 works both of nature and of art. In animate beings we are 

 gratified by the recognition that a certain form is suited to 

 the wants of the animal, and that certain desired effects or 

 motions are produced with case and little effort. It is on 

 this principle that we admire the beauty of the human form, 

 every part of which is perfectly fitted for its intended pur- 

 . and that we admire tho motions of a horse, a stag, a 

 greyhound, or a cat, as being made without any apparent 

 trouble or difficulty, and as the result of a power which 

 accomplishes its end with the least possible expense of ex- 

 ertion. The same feeling which makeg us take pleasure 

 in movements and forms which indicate ease, leads us like- 

 wise to dislike those which express constraint and toil : 

 hence, both in nature and art, all forced and laboured atti- 

 tudes, all tension of muscle, all visible and overstrained 

 efforts to produce a certain effect, or to express a certain 

 feeling (which is the source of affectation in art), are offen- 

 sive to the taste. And thus all angular and jerking action, 

 and all heavy dragging of the limbs, are devoid of beauty, 

 as being signs of violent and toilsome effort, and as equally 

 removed, though in contrary ways, from that equable, flow- 

 ing, and easy motion in which grace consists. Nor is it 

 only in animals that the marks of ease are agreeable to us ; 

 the varied, (lowing, and irregular outline which characterizes 

 the free growth of plants, is beautiful on the same prin- 

 ciple: 'wherever (as Mr. Alison remarks) we find vege- 

 tables, or any other delicate body, assume a winding form, 

 we are impressed with the conviction of its being easy, 

 agreeable to their nature, and free from force or constraint. 

 On the contrary, when such bodies in the line of their pro- 

 gress assume angular forms, we have a strong impression 

 of the operation of force, of something that either prevents 

 them from their natural direction, or that constrains them 

 to assume an unnatural one.' (Essay on Taste, vol. i. 

 p. 33-1.) It was the perception of this fact which induced 

 Ilo^arth to imagine that beauty of outline consists in its 

 serpentine direction, which is true of those animate and 

 organized beings whose wants require them to assume this 

 shape ; but does not apply to other objects, such as buildings 

 or walks, in which convenience requires a straight or an- 

 gular form, and in which a straight or angular form is there- 

 lore beautiful. The beauty of proportion or symmetry in 

 the forms of animals is likewise derived from a sense of 

 utility ; for it is manifest that small limbs would not suit 

 tlic wants of a larjre body ; that a large foot would be an in- 

 cumbrance to a small leg ; that a large hand would be an 

 iiH-umbrance to a small arm, &c. For the same reason 

 nt animals have different proportions, as their bodies 

 are formed on different scales and adapted to different pur- 



poses; and thus the form or size which is beautiful in one 

 animal would be monstrous in another, as if the long neck 

 of the camelopard, an animal living on the leaves of trees, 

 were given to the lion, whose teeth and claws are adapted 

 to seizing and tearing the flesh of animals; or if the antlers 

 of a stag were fixed on the forehead of a clog. (Horace, Dp, 

 Arte Poet,, at the be" inning : on some exceptions to this 

 principle, See Hogarth's Analysis of Beauty, c. 6 ; Miiller's 

 Archceologie der Kunut, p. 11.) And thus the limbs of the 

 human body, or the features of the human face, are beau- 

 tiful only in their proper places, when they are taken in 

 combination with the other parts of the body, and so 

 manifestly suggest the notion that they are fitted to perform 

 their respective offices. 



* Tis not a lip or clieek we beauty call, 

 but the joint force and full result of alt* 



All incongruous combinations in animate beings are con- 

 trary to beauty : for example, the pink and white com- 

 plexion, which suits the delicacy and weakness of the 

 female form and character, is less becoming to man than 

 the dark-red and brown, which characterize the sun-burnt 

 cheek of a person accustomed to rural labours, to athletic 

 exercises, to field-sports, and to a military or naval life. 

 Feminine forms and colours are sometimes admired in young 

 men; and in women, as in gipsies, a dark complexion is 

 often extremely beautiful : but an effeminate appearance is 

 not in general more approved in men than an effeminate 

 mind : and muscular or athletic forms in women are com- 

 monly considered coarse and clumsy, a judgment confirmed 

 by the taste of the Greek artists, who, in representing 

 Diana as a huntress, with her dogs, her arrows, and her 

 garments girded up for running, never give her a masculine 

 form. 



Hence the middle form in the different species of animals 

 is the most beautiful ; that is to say, it is that abstract form 

 at which the painter or sculptor arrives by rejecting all the 

 faulty extremes, and which he takes as the type from which 

 the varieties of individuals diverge in different directions. 

 Thus the most beautiful size in man is between a giant and 

 a dwarf; or, to take an instance in a single feature, the 

 most beautiful form of the nose is when the outline is 

 straight : any deviation from this form on either side, so as 

 to make it like that of the fauns in Greek sculpture, or to 

 give it a protuberance, is injurious to the beauty of the hu- 

 man countenance. (See Miiller, Archceol. der Kunst, s. 329, 

 n. 5.) And as it is with the general form of the human 

 race, or of the several limbs and features, so is it with parti- 

 cular classes. Thus, ' though the forms of childhood and 

 age differ exceedingly, there is a common form in childhood 

 and a common form in age, which is the more perfect, as it 

 is the more remote from all peculiarities.' (Reynolds' Dis- 

 course 3.) Reynolds, however, is mistaken when he goes 

 on to say that the middle form is beautiful because it is the 

 most common (see Idler, No. 82); for, as has been truly 

 remarked, there are many forms of frequent and ordinary 

 occurrence which are by no means beautiful. The beauty 

 of the middle form arises from its being that which is the 

 most suited to the purposes and wants of the animal : thus 

 if a nose, a mouth, or an eye was very much above, or very 

 much below the average size, it would either be inconve- 

 nient from its magnitude, or incapable of performing its 

 functions on account of its smallness. Having once esta- 

 blished this maxim in our minds, we forget, as in many 

 other instances, the principle on which it is founded ; and 

 although a nose, fur example, would be equally fitted for its 

 purposes if it deviated slightly from the straight line, yet we 

 consider that line alone as the standard of ideal beauty. 



The reason why we are gratified by the perception of con- 

 gruity or fitness in the general structure of an animate body 

 and of its several component parts, by the appearance of 

 ease and grace in the movements of animals, and univer- 

 sally by all the marks of activity, vigour, energy, and health, 

 is that we are gratified by the absence of suffering, as we 

 are pained by its presence, as when a person not hardened 

 by custom to such sights witnesses an execution, a sur- 

 gical operation, the slaughter of animals, a field of battle 

 covered with the dead and dying, a hospital, &c. Hence 

 all those objects which suggest the notion of pain, dis- 

 comfort, or decay, are devoid of beauty. Such is the case 

 with animals, as the elephant or the hippopotamus, which 

 are heavy and cumbrous in their shape and appear to 

 drag their limbs with difficulty and effort ; suggesting 

 none of those impressions of joy and satisfaction in the 



Q2 



