THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ANIMAL PLAY. 317 



if it were, would only increase the pain instead of chang- 

 ing it into a subject for rejoicing. 



I believe, therefore, that in genuine absorbing play 

 the oscillation from appearance to reality is an unneces- 

 sary as well as an improbable hypothesis. The idea un- 

 recognised by consciousness gliding over from the real 

 ego, that the whole world of appearance depends on our- 

 selves, that we create it from material within us,* is 

 sufficient to prevent our mistaking the make-believe for 

 reality, without, however, making it necessary for us 

 clearly to hold the difference in mind.f This conclu- 

 sion brings us to a second point, which we may now con- 

 sider, finding in it a more definite answer to the question. 



2. The Feeling of Freedom in Make-helieve. 



Connecting the idea of freedom with that of make- 

 believe brings us back to Schiller. There are two kinds 

 of temperament belonging to genius. The one strives 

 for what is attainable, the other for what is not. 

 Schiller says: "The one is noble by reason of attain- 

 ment, the other in proportion as he approaches infinite 

 greatness." He himself belongs to the second class ; he 

 with Michelangelo and Beethoven are types of the eter- 

 nally striving and struggling genius straining for the 

 unattainable, in whom the artist's gift is nourished by 



» This is why we are proud of the capacity for such creation. 

 It is a kind of joy in being able. 



+ In support of this position I appeal again to the tragic drama. 

 When feelings produced by inner imitation, and voluntarily called 

 forth, become so painful as to counterbalance the pleasure derived 

 from esthetic satisfaction, we call in the help of our knowledge of 

 its unreality to dampen the ardour of our emotions. But so long 

 as we are in full a-sthetic enjoyment we do not think of this until 

 the play is over, though it is responsible for half our pleasure. 



