DOI article:
Jaźwierski, Jacek: "The Judgement of Hercules": Shaftesbury at the Crossroads of Art Theory
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.56525#0039
38
JACEK JAŻWIERSKI
Fréart de Chambray explained that “Paynling [... ] will indeed require different Eyes to contemplate and enjoy
her Beauty intirely: For the Eye of the Understanding, is the first and principal Judge of what she under-
takes.”61 According to Fréart, the fifth part of painting, i.e. “the Regular Position of Figures” consists mainly
in what he calls “Perspective’’" or “Optica"" “that ’tis an Art of seeing by our Reasons and Eyes intellectual.""
Accordingly, the painter “should first adjust his Eye with his Reason by the Principles of Art, which teaches
us to behold things, not as they appear in themselves only, but as they ought to be.”62
Similarly, colour and landscape, two most obvious candidates for creating the visual principle of the tab-
lature, escaped Shaftesbury’s all pervading moral order only partially. Shaftesbury did not recognize the sig-
nificance of lights and shadows but he did recognize the role of colours and their harmony. For him, harmony
was not a visual tuning of colours but “one and the same Spirit” which “without contest [may] reign through
the whole of the Design.”63 Colours, however, should harmonize not with themselves but with character of the
story. In Plastics, Shaftesbury admitted expressive role of colours which Charles Lebrun called I ’expression
generale™ and noted: “Colouring and tints in the same manner suitable: if tragical, tragic, and so in general and
particular each figure with harmony considered.”65 In Hercules, after stressing that the true master should always
observe “the Agreement or Correspondency of things”, he used the comparison with musical composition to
explain the role the harmony of colours. “’ [T]is necessary he [a painter] shou’d form in his Mind a certain Note
or Character of Unity, which being happily taken, wou’d out of the many Colours of his Piece, produce (if one
may say so) a particular distinct Species of an original kind: like those Compositions in Musick, where among
the different Airs (such as Sonatas, Entrys, or Sarabands) there are different and distinct species; of which we
may say in particular, as to each, ‘That it has its own proper Character or Genius, peculiar to itself’.”66 This mu-
sical metaphor resembles Poussin’s conception of modi utilized by subsequent French theoreticians, including
Lebrun and de Piles, as a bridge spanning history with formal structure of the work (light, shade and colour)
by means of expression and decorum - lights, shades and colours should harmonize with emotional tone of the
story, tragic or joyous. But it turns out that for Shaftesbury, who replaced the word “modus"" with the “Key”, this
uniform character was not emotional but ornamental. He meant by it the affinity between the richness of colour
of the principal figure and the rest of the picture. Thus the musical harmony of colours was subordinated to the
general rule of decorum, with the character of the main hero as its source. For Shaftesbury, colours should not
distract the eyes by any formal or visual independence but lead them to recognize the moral order of the story.
Colours were “instruments, [...] [m]eans: not end. Imitation, lesson, instruction, pedagogy of the eye.”67 The
judicious eyes use colours as instruments of rational extraction of the moral meaning from visual means.
Another part of painting which contributed to Lebrun’s I ’expression generale was the type of landscape
which Shaftesbury called “perspective”. Contrary to Lebrun, for whom landscape, together with colours,
lights and shades, was an expressive vehicle of general mood of the picture, Shaftesbury considered it as
“Episodici", unnecessary addition to the subject-matter. It “wou’d prove a mere Incumbrance to the Eye,
and of necessity disturb the Sight, by diverting it from that which is principal, the History and Fact.""™ For
him, the landscape by no means participated in the picture as a whole, not in terms of academic I ’expression
generale, nor de Piles’ harmony of colours, but stood in opposition to history and could potentially degrade
moral nobility of the subject. “Whatsoever appears in a historical Design, which is not essential to the Action,
serves only to confound the Representation and perplex the Mind.”69 “A just Design, or Tablature, shou’d
at first view discover what Nature it is design’d to imitate [...] The Piece must by no means be equivocal or
de la grandeur des pensées, & de la parfaite connoissance qu’ont les Peinties & les Sculpteurs des choses qu’il y a un Ail tout particulier qui
est détaché de la materie & de la main de 1’ Artisan, pai' lequel il doit d’abord former ses Tableaux dans son esprit, & sans quoi un Peintre ne
peut faire avec le pinceau seul un ouvrage parfait, n’étant pas de cét Aii comme de ceux où Tindustiie & l’adresse de la main suffisent pour
donner de la beante.”
61 Fréart de Chambray, An Idea of the Perfection of Painting, p. 4.
62 Ibidem, pp. 20-21.
63 Judgment of Hercules, pp. 30-31.
64 In his Conference sur I 'Expression generale & particuliere (Amsterdam-Paris 1698) Lebrun distinguished between two kinds of
expression, general and particular, the first being a mood of painting created by formal aspects of painting, colour, light, shadows as well as
the type of landscape, the second consisting in facial and bodily movements of the figures.
65 Plastics, [in:] Second Characters, p. 131.
66 Judgment of Hercules, p. 30.
67 Plastics, [in:] Second Characters, p. 146.
68 Judgment of Hercules, p. 33.
69 Ibidem, p. 33.
JACEK JAŻWIERSKI
Fréart de Chambray explained that “Paynling [... ] will indeed require different Eyes to contemplate and enjoy
her Beauty intirely: For the Eye of the Understanding, is the first and principal Judge of what she under-
takes.”61 According to Fréart, the fifth part of painting, i.e. “the Regular Position of Figures” consists mainly
in what he calls “Perspective’’" or “Optica"" “that ’tis an Art of seeing by our Reasons and Eyes intellectual.""
Accordingly, the painter “should first adjust his Eye with his Reason by the Principles of Art, which teaches
us to behold things, not as they appear in themselves only, but as they ought to be.”62
Similarly, colour and landscape, two most obvious candidates for creating the visual principle of the tab-
lature, escaped Shaftesbury’s all pervading moral order only partially. Shaftesbury did not recognize the sig-
nificance of lights and shadows but he did recognize the role of colours and their harmony. For him, harmony
was not a visual tuning of colours but “one and the same Spirit” which “without contest [may] reign through
the whole of the Design.”63 Colours, however, should harmonize not with themselves but with character of the
story. In Plastics, Shaftesbury admitted expressive role of colours which Charles Lebrun called I ’expression
generale™ and noted: “Colouring and tints in the same manner suitable: if tragical, tragic, and so in general and
particular each figure with harmony considered.”65 In Hercules, after stressing that the true master should always
observe “the Agreement or Correspondency of things”, he used the comparison with musical composition to
explain the role the harmony of colours. “’ [T]is necessary he [a painter] shou’d form in his Mind a certain Note
or Character of Unity, which being happily taken, wou’d out of the many Colours of his Piece, produce (if one
may say so) a particular distinct Species of an original kind: like those Compositions in Musick, where among
the different Airs (such as Sonatas, Entrys, or Sarabands) there are different and distinct species; of which we
may say in particular, as to each, ‘That it has its own proper Character or Genius, peculiar to itself’.”66 This mu-
sical metaphor resembles Poussin’s conception of modi utilized by subsequent French theoreticians, including
Lebrun and de Piles, as a bridge spanning history with formal structure of the work (light, shade and colour)
by means of expression and decorum - lights, shades and colours should harmonize with emotional tone of the
story, tragic or joyous. But it turns out that for Shaftesbury, who replaced the word “modus"" with the “Key”, this
uniform character was not emotional but ornamental. He meant by it the affinity between the richness of colour
of the principal figure and the rest of the picture. Thus the musical harmony of colours was subordinated to the
general rule of decorum, with the character of the main hero as its source. For Shaftesbury, colours should not
distract the eyes by any formal or visual independence but lead them to recognize the moral order of the story.
Colours were “instruments, [...] [m]eans: not end. Imitation, lesson, instruction, pedagogy of the eye.”67 The
judicious eyes use colours as instruments of rational extraction of the moral meaning from visual means.
Another part of painting which contributed to Lebrun’s I ’expression generale was the type of landscape
which Shaftesbury called “perspective”. Contrary to Lebrun, for whom landscape, together with colours,
lights and shades, was an expressive vehicle of general mood of the picture, Shaftesbury considered it as
“Episodici", unnecessary addition to the subject-matter. It “wou’d prove a mere Incumbrance to the Eye,
and of necessity disturb the Sight, by diverting it from that which is principal, the History and Fact.""™ For
him, the landscape by no means participated in the picture as a whole, not in terms of academic I ’expression
generale, nor de Piles’ harmony of colours, but stood in opposition to history and could potentially degrade
moral nobility of the subject. “Whatsoever appears in a historical Design, which is not essential to the Action,
serves only to confound the Representation and perplex the Mind.”69 “A just Design, or Tablature, shou’d
at first view discover what Nature it is design’d to imitate [...] The Piece must by no means be equivocal or
de la grandeur des pensées, & de la parfaite connoissance qu’ont les Peinties & les Sculpteurs des choses qu’il y a un Ail tout particulier qui
est détaché de la materie & de la main de 1’ Artisan, pai' lequel il doit d’abord former ses Tableaux dans son esprit, & sans quoi un Peintre ne
peut faire avec le pinceau seul un ouvrage parfait, n’étant pas de cét Aii comme de ceux où Tindustiie & l’adresse de la main suffisent pour
donner de la beante.”
61 Fréart de Chambray, An Idea of the Perfection of Painting, p. 4.
62 Ibidem, pp. 20-21.
63 Judgment of Hercules, pp. 30-31.
64 In his Conference sur I 'Expression generale & particuliere (Amsterdam-Paris 1698) Lebrun distinguished between two kinds of
expression, general and particular, the first being a mood of painting created by formal aspects of painting, colour, light, shadows as well as
the type of landscape, the second consisting in facial and bodily movements of the figures.
65 Plastics, [in:] Second Characters, p. 131.
66 Judgment of Hercules, p. 30.
67 Plastics, [in:] Second Characters, p. 146.
68 Judgment of Hercules, p. 33.
69 Ibidem, p. 33.