judgement。 Now； imagination rather entitles an art to be called an inspired （geistreiche） than a fine art。 It is only in respect of judgement that the name of fine art is deserved。 Hence it follows that judgement； being the indispensable condition （conditio sine qua non）； is at least what one must look to as of capital importance in forming an estimate of art as fine art。 So far as beauty is concerned； to be fertile and original in ideas is not such an imperative requirement as it is that the imagination in its freedom should be in accordance with the understanding's conformity to law。 For； in lawless freedom； imagination； with all its wealth； produces nothing but nonsense； the power of judgement； on the other hand； is the faculty that makes it consonant with understanding。 Taste； like judgement in general； is the discipline （or corrective） of genius。 It severely clips its wings； and makes it orderly or polished； but at the same time it gives it guidance directing and controlling its flight； so that it may preserve its character of finality。 It introduces a clearness and order into the plenitude of thought； and in so doing gives stability to the ideas； and qualifies them at once for permanent and universal approval； for being followed by others； and for a continually progressive culture。 And so； where the interests of both these qualities clash in a product； and there has to be a sacrifice of something； then it should rather be on the side of genius； and judgement； which in matters of fine art bases its decision on its own proper principles； will more readily endure an abatement of the freedom and wealth of the imagination than that the understanding should be compromised。 The requisites for fine art are； therefore； imagination； understanding； soul； and taste。*
*The first three faculties are first brought into union by means of the fourth。 Hume； in his history； informs the English that although they are second in their works to no other people in the world in respect the evidences they afford of the three first qualities separately considered； still in what unites them they must yield to their neighbours； the French。
SS 51。 The division of the fine arts。
Beauty （whether it be of nature or of art） may in general be termed the expression of aesthetic ideas。 But the provision must be added that with beauty of art this idea must be excited through the medium of a concept of the object； whereas with beauty of nature the bare reflection upon a given intuition； apart from any concept of what the object is intended to be； is sufficient for awakening and communicating the idea of which that object is regarded as the expression。 Accordingly； if we wish to make a division of the fine arts； we can choose for that purpose； tentatively at least； no more convenient principle than the analogy which art bears to the mode of expression of which men avail themselves in speech with a view to communicating themselves to one another as completely as possible； i。e。； not merely in respect of their concepts but in respect of their sensations also。* Such expression consists in word； gesture； and tone （articulation； gesticulation； and modulation）。 It is the combination of these three modes of expression which alone constitutes a complete communication of the speaker。 For thought； intuition； and sensation are in this way conveyed to others simultaneously and in conjunction。
*The reader is not to consider this scheme for a possible division of the fine arts as a deliberate theory。 It is only one of the various attempts that can and ought to be made。
Hence there are only three kinds of fine art： the art of speech； formative art； and the art of the play of sensations （as external sense impressions）。 This division might also be arranged as a dichotomy； so that fine art would be divided into that of the expression of thoughts or intuitions； the latter being subdivided according to the distinction between the form and the matter （sensation）。 It would； however； in that case appear too abstract； and less in line with popular concepztions。 （1） The arts of speech are rhetoric and poetry。 Rhetoric is the art of transacting a serious business of the understanding as if it were a free play of the imagination； poetry that of conducting a free play of the imagination as if it were a serious business of the understanding。 Thus the orator announces a serious business； and for the purpose of entertaining his audience conducts it as if it were a mere play with ideas。 The poet promises merely an entertaining play with ideas； and yet for the understanding there enures as much as if the promotion of its business had been his one intention。 The combination and harmony of the two faculties of cognition； sensibility and understanding； which； though doubtless indispensable to one another； do not readily permit of being united without compulsion and reciprocal abatement； must have the appearance of being undesigned and a spontaneous occurrence…otherwise it is not fine art。 For this reason what is studied and laboured must be here avoided。 For fine art must be free art in a double sense： i。e。； not alone in a sense opposed to contract work； as not being a work the magnitude of which may be estimated； exacted； or paid for； according to a definite standard； but free also in the sense that； while the mind； no doubt； occupies itself； still it does so without ulterior regard to any other end； and yet with a feeling of satisfaction and stimulation （independent of reward）。 The orator； therefore； gives something which he does not promise； viz。； an entertaining play of the imagination。 On the other hand； there is something in which he fails to come up to his promise； and a thing； too； which is his avowed business； namely； the engagement of the understanding to some end。 The poet's promise； on the contrary； is a modest one； and a mere play with ideas is all he holds out to us； but he accomplishes something worthy of being made a serious business； namely； the using of play to provide food for the understanding； and the giving of life to its concepts by means of the imagination。 Hence the orator in reality performs less than he promises； the poet more。 （2） The formative arts； or those for the expression of ideas in sensuous intuition （not by means of representations of mere imagination that are excited by words） are arts either of sensuous truth or of sensuous semblance。 The first is called plastic art； the second painting。 Both use figures in space for the expression of ideas： the former makes figures discernible to two senses； sight and touch （though； so far as the latter sense is concerned； without regard to beauty）； the latter makes them so to the former sense alone。 The aesthetic idea （archetype； original） is the fundamental basis of both in the imagination； but the figure which constitutes its expression （the ectype； the copy） is given either in its bodily extension （the way the object itself exists） or else in accordance with the picture which it forms of itself in the eye （according to its appearance when projected on a flat surface）。 Or； whatever the archetype is； either the reference to an actual end or only the semblance of one may be imposed upon reflection as its condition。 To plastic art； as the first kind of formative fine art； belong sculpture and architecture。 The first is that which presents concepts of things corporeally； as they might exist in nature （though as fine art it directs its attention to aesthetic finality）。 The second is the art of presenting concepts of things which are possible only through art； and the determining ground of whose form is not nature but an arbitrary end…and of presenting them both with a view to this purpose and yet； at the same time； with aesthetic finality。 In architecture the chief point is a certain use of the artistic object to which； as the condition； the aesthetic ideas are limited。 In sculpture the mere expression of aesthetic ideas is the main intention。 Thus statues of men； gods； animals； etc。； belong to sculpture； but temples； splendid buildings for public concourse； or even dwelling…houses； triumphal arches； columns； mausoleums； etc。； erected as monuments； belong to architecture； and in fact all household furniture （the work of cabinetmakers； and so forth…things meant to be used） may be added to the list； on the ground that adaptation of the product to a particular use is the essential element in a work of architecture。 On the other hand； a mere piece of sculpture； made simply to be looked at and intended to please on its own account； is； as a corporeal presentation； a mere imitation of nature； though one in which regard is paid to aesthetic ideas； and in which； therefore； sensuous truth should not go the length of losing the appearance of being an art and a product of the elective will。 Painting； as the second kind of formative art； which presents the sensuous semblance in artful combination with ideas； I would divide into that of the beautiful Portrayal of nature； and that of the beautiful arrangement of its products。 The first is painting proper； the second landscape gardening。 For the first gives only the semblance of bodily extension； whereas the second； giving this； no doubt； according to its truth； gives only the semblance of utility and employment for ends other than the play of the imagination in the contemplation of its forms。* The latter consists in no more than decking out the ground with the same manifold variety （grasses； flowers； shrubs； and trees； and even water； hills； and dales） as that with which nature presents it to our view； only arranged differently and in obedience to certain ideas。 The beautiful arrangement of corporeal things； however； is also a thing for the eye only； just like painting…the sense of touch can form no intuitable representation of such a form； In addition I would place under the head of painting； in the wide sense； the decoration of rooms by means of hangings； ornamental accessories； and all beautiful furniture the sole function of which is to be looked at； and in the same way the art of tasteful dressing （with rings； snuffboxes； etc。）。 For a parterre of various flowers； a room with a variety of ornaments （including even the ladies' attire）； go to make a