Chapter III.

Was Delsarte a Philosopher?

If we consider philosophy in the light of all the questions upon which

it touches, the subjects which it embraces, we must answer "No;" but if

we concentrate the word within the limits of æsthetics, we may reply in

the affirmative. Did not Delsarte point out the origin of art, its

object and its aim?

Not that this master never exceeded the limits of his science and his

method. He had sketched out a "Treatise on Reason," and had begun to

classify the faculties of being, entering into the subject more

profoundly than the categories of Kant; but all this only exists in mere

outline, in a technology whose terms have not been weighed and connected

together by a solid chain of reasoning: logic has not uttered its final

word therein.

A separate volume would be required to give an idea of these _gigantic

sketches_, which must remain in their rudimentary state.

If Delsarte had finished his work, it would seem that he must have

leaned toward the scholastic method, now so much out of favor; but

certainly he would put his own personality into this, as into everything

that he undertook to investigate; for he was held back on the steeps of

mysticism by the science which he had created, and which could only

afford a shelter to the supernatural as an extension of those psychical

faculties which have been called intuition, imagination, etc.

Then the influence of Raymond Brucker, who died shortly after Delsarte,

being lessened, and conscientious and patient study having fed the flame

in that vast brain, we might have obtained affirmations of a new order.

And Delsarte might have met with thinkers like Leibnitz, Descartes and

Jean Reynaud, on that height where religion is purged of superstition

and fanaticism, philosophy set free from atheism and materialism!

If Delsarte had a fault, it was that he regarded all modern philosophy

as sensuous naturalism; and if reason sometimes seemed to him

suspicious, it was because he often confounded it with sophistry, which

reasons indeed, but is far from being _reason_.

Let us regret that Delsarte never finished his complete philosophy; but

let us be grateful to him for having raised his art and all arts to the

level of philosophy, by giving them truth as a basis and morality as a

final aim; which fairly justifies, it seems to me, the title of

_artist-philosopher_, which I have sometimes applied to him.

I should not neglect, in this connection, to set down the explanation,

given by Delsarte, of what he meant by the word _trinity_, as used in

his scientific system. The reader cannot fail to see the elements of a

system of philosophy in this succinct statement, this outline to be

filled up:

"The principle of the system lies in the statement that there is in the

world a universal formula which may be applied to all sciences, to all

things possible: --this formula is _the trinity_.

"What is requisite for the formation of a trinity?

"Three expressions are requisite, each presupposing and implying the

other two. Each of three terms must imply the other two. There must also

be an absolute co-necessity between them; thus, the three principles of

our being--life, mind and soul--form a trinity.

"Why?

"Because life and mind are one and the same soul; soul and mind are one

and the same life; life and soul are one and the same mind."

Delsarte System of Oratory · 第 3 / 21 章