DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68516#0086
EGYPTIAN ART
full of significance from the point of view of the attitude to sensibility
we are enquiring into.
Egyptian art, then, has always exercised a peculiar fascination upon
the European mind, and one thing has helped to produce this effect,
namely the peculiar consistency and conformity with itself of the
Egyptian style. Perhaps more than any other art it has its own peculiar
flavour—and that flavour is very strong and immediately recognizable
to everybody, even those most ignorant of art. There is not a jerry-
builder in England who would not be able if required to give an
Egyptian flavour to a cheap desirable residence. It is indeed compar-
able to the Chinese style in this respect of its extremely potent flavour,
and what is most remarkable is that in its age-long course Egyptian art
always retained this stylistic consistency. Indeed, this is so marked that
it is often not easy for an outsider to make any sort of true judgment of
the period to which an Egyptian art-object belongs, whereas in Euro-
pean art changes of style are so marked that they at once jump to the
eye of the uninitiated. Plato remarked on the ‘conservatism’ of
Egyptian art: it was not lawful to introduce any novelty. By observing
you will discover that the paintings and sculptures of the Nile valley
executed millenniums ago are neither more beautiful nor more ugly
than those turned out at the present day, but are worked according to
the same formula. This is not to say that Egyptian art did not change and
grow, did not acquire new powers and lose old, but that these changes
never broke the outer skin of the style.
We must remember, however, that the same thing holds true of the
art of Mesopotamia, as long as the Empires lasted. There too a specific
flavour remains, with perhaps even less variety, for many centuries.
I think the explanation is in both cases the same. It was due to the
essentially conceptual notion of vision which was so firmly rooted in the
habits of the people that it was never broken down. And here I must
deal very briefly with a question which, although it lies rather outside
our proper enquiry, and is no doubt familiar to you, is of such funda-
mental importance that it is worth restating.
< 5° >
full of significance from the point of view of the attitude to sensibility
we are enquiring into.
Egyptian art, then, has always exercised a peculiar fascination upon
the European mind, and one thing has helped to produce this effect,
namely the peculiar consistency and conformity with itself of the
Egyptian style. Perhaps more than any other art it has its own peculiar
flavour—and that flavour is very strong and immediately recognizable
to everybody, even those most ignorant of art. There is not a jerry-
builder in England who would not be able if required to give an
Egyptian flavour to a cheap desirable residence. It is indeed compar-
able to the Chinese style in this respect of its extremely potent flavour,
and what is most remarkable is that in its age-long course Egyptian art
always retained this stylistic consistency. Indeed, this is so marked that
it is often not easy for an outsider to make any sort of true judgment of
the period to which an Egyptian art-object belongs, whereas in Euro-
pean art changes of style are so marked that they at once jump to the
eye of the uninitiated. Plato remarked on the ‘conservatism’ of
Egyptian art: it was not lawful to introduce any novelty. By observing
you will discover that the paintings and sculptures of the Nile valley
executed millenniums ago are neither more beautiful nor more ugly
than those turned out at the present day, but are worked according to
the same formula. This is not to say that Egyptian art did not change and
grow, did not acquire new powers and lose old, but that these changes
never broke the outer skin of the style.
We must remember, however, that the same thing holds true of the
art of Mesopotamia, as long as the Empires lasted. There too a specific
flavour remains, with perhaps even less variety, for many centuries.
I think the explanation is in both cases the same. It was due to the
essentially conceptual notion of vision which was so firmly rooted in the
habits of the people that it was never broken down. And here I must
deal very briefly with a question which, although it lies rather outside
our proper enquiry, and is no doubt familiar to you, is of such funda-
mental importance that it is worth restating.
< 5° >