Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 6.djvu/176

 160 L. T. HOBHOUSE : ment from what men do ; and speaking generally as we pass from the abstract to the organic universal Syllogism must give place to that correlation of independent general- isations, which, in its nearest approach to Syllogism, is identical with the Concrete Deduction of Mill. What the organic universal lacks in relation to formal reasoning it makes good in respect of what we may call the method of art. There are two opposite fallacies with regard to artistic representation in this matter of the Universal. The first is that art should give us the type as such, that its men and women should be embodied formulae like Inspector Javert, or personified negations like the early Victorian heroine. This amounts to a confusion between art and mathematics. The countervailing fiction is that art should give us the individual as such, which would reduce painting to photography, and the romantic to the grotesque. It is now an old saying that the truth of both views is to be found in the Concrete Universal. And on our view this will mean that Art represents a piece of life which with all the richness of its individuality is yet easily recognisable as but one modi- fication of the common experience of man. The element of identity is the touch of nature which makes the whole world kin. The misfortunes of Priam are not such as could fall on you and me, and the drama of the Trojan War would look strangely on the stage of our experience. But in Art the kinship is revealed, and the common human element is felt : Sunt hie etiain sua praemia laudi, Sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt. The art-created individual is a starting-point for thought in which the paths of analogy and generalisation are already indicated. The lines of conceptual structure are made clear in the concrete like the limbs of a statue under drapery. It comes to us with an atmosphere of suggestiveness and expansion due to the host of half-formed comparisons and inferences of which it becomes spontaneously the centre. And as inference is mostly unconscious, we may never draw explicit generalisations from it, and if we do, they are likely to be inadequate expressions of our real meaning. But it will affect our attitude none the less, and will give us a sureness of touch which we could certainly not derive from the abstractions of the subject. An intelligent foreigner might learn something of our tenant-farmer class, say, by the study of blue books and histories. But he would learn a good deal more from the study of Mrs. Poyser.