Art and nature

Art mastering Nature

Prospero’s magic, power over nature (tempest, Ariel, guilty ones) + language over people (Caliban)

Nature = ? heart of of art?

Mimesis + theater
New drama: mix of genres…

What are really art and nature, contrast, building new visions?

Theater and Art revealing true Nature(s)

“natural man” Caliban and civilized (educated) man P?
Human nature: compassion over magic, reality over illusions (good polo)

Human nature: good VS evil

Nature= force. Art= magic force too… Duelling?

art (n.) 1 knowledge, learning, scholarship, science

art (n.) 2 accomplishment, achievement, skill

art (n.) 3 skill, knack, dexterity

art (n.) 4 knowledge, mastery, acquisition

art (n.) 5 practical application, knowledge drawn from experience

art (n.) 6 magic, enchantment, trickery

art (n.) 7 artifice, artificial conduct; or: wile, trick

art (n.) 8 rhetorical art, verbal artistry

nature (n.) 1 natural feelings, natural affection

nature (n.) 2 natural powers, normal state [of mind and body]

nature (n.) 3 human nature

nature (n.) 4 mortal life, natural life

nature (n.) 5 personality, innate disposition, character

nature (n.) 6 natural order, ungoverned state, way of the world [often personified]
nature (n.) 7 function, capacity, role

atural (adj.) 1 feeling proper affection, having normal feelings

natural (adj.) 2 personal, formed by nature

natural (adj.) 3 legitimate, by birthright, rightful

natural (adj.) 4 related by blood

natural (adj.) 5 inherent, intrinsic

natural (adj.) 6 lacking artifice, reflecting the reality of the world

natural (adv.) like a half-wit, idiotically

Unnatural Behavior. Like As You Like It and Macbeth, The Tempest is concerned with a conflict
brought about by the "unnatural" behavior of a villainous protagonist (in this case Prospero's
younger brother Antonio) who plots against and overthrows the rightful ruler of the land,
usurping the throne. Like Duke Frederick in As You Like It, Antonio is doubly "unnatural": in
usurping the throne of Milan, he has sinned against God (since a monarch was thought to rule
through divine will) and violated the bonds of brotherly love (and of human decency, exposing
his banished brother's innocent daughter to a life of hardship or death). Antonio's "unnatural"
behaviour also recalls that of the traitors in Henry V: in order to usurp his brother's Dukedom,
he conspired with Alonso, King of Naples, the traditional enemy of Milan, whom he now
serves. But (as in Macbeth), what goes around comes around: shipwrecked on Prospero's
island, Antonio is at the mercy of the brother he deposed, while Alonso's younger brother
Sebastian plots to kill him and usurp his throne. (The presence of two sets of "unnatural"
brothers is another parallel with As You Like It, where Duke Frederick's treatment of Duke
Senior was doubled by Oliver's unnatural cruelty to Orlando.) Look for passages that illustrate
these parallels as you read. Note references to "natural" and "unnatural" behavior, to divine
justice or Providence, and to "nature" in the text. Be sure that you have the various characters
straight!

Fitness to Rule. As the above analogies suggest, Shakespeare seems once again (as
inMacbeth) to have shied away from painting a picture in "black and white" -- both Caliban and
Prospero are richly ambiguous figures. Caliban is at least half human -- and Shakespeare takes
care to remind us of it, imbuing him at times with a surprising nobility. Prospero on the other
hand cannot be considered an entirely blameless monarch. He is the rightful duke of Milan,
but was he a good and responsible ruler? What did he care about most? (What are the only
things he took with him to the island of his exile?) Did Antonio have some justification in
usurping the throne? On the island, Prospero governs with absolute authority -- a strength he
did not show as duke of Milan. Is that why he regains his throne? (Having learned to govern
"correctly," does he now "deserve" to be duke?) What is the source of his power upon the
island? Is there a relationship between that power and his weakness in Milan? Why must he
abjure his magic and "drown his book" (V.i.57) before returning to Milan? Could Prospero also
be acknowledging his own dark side when he says (of Caliban), "this thing of darkness I/
acknowledge mine" (V.i. 275-276)? Both the "monster" Calibanand the "good" Ariel serve the
"tyrant" Prospero unwillingly and chafe against his rule, and Prospero calls them both his
"slave" (see I.ii.270, 344, 351, 374).

And what about Ariel? A spirit in the service of the magician Prospero, he is similar to the fairy
Puck who serves the Fairy King Oberon in A Midsummer Night's Dream. Note passages which
make clear these parallels. But there are essential differences. Consider e.g. the bonds that tie
them to their respective lords. Is their service offered willingly? Is it equally justifiable in each
case? (Service to one's king or rightful lord is considered to be part of the "natural order" in
Shakespeare's time. But is Prospero Ariel's rightful king?) On the other hand, Prospero seems
to feel genuine affection for Ariel, who for the most part serves him cheerfully enough. What
do we make of that relationship? Finally, in A Midsummer Night's Dream we noted that in
addition to being forces of Nature, the Fairies represented something concerning the power
of dreams -- or of poetry, or of art -- to change "reality." Is anything analogous going on in The
Tempest? Look for passages that emphasize the link betweenlearning (books, poetry, art),
magic and power. Recall that The Tempest, Shakespeare's last complete work before retiring
to Stratford, has commonly been considered Shakespeare's "farewell to poetry" (Prospero
breaking his staff, source of his magic, equals Shakespeare breaking his "pen," source
of his magical artistry). To what extend can we equate Prospero's magic with Shakespeare's
literary artistry or, more generally, with the magic of the theater?

The Tempest - Art vs. Nature

Written by Yeo Siew Lian, 2A01B, 1996.
"... the natural man functions like the virtuous shepherd of normal pastoral, to indicate
corruption and degeneracy in the civilized world; if the natural man is a brute, so much
more terrible is the sin of the nobleman who abases below the natural." Consider the
debate between Art and Nature in the play The Tempest.

The debate between Art and Nature in The Tempest is very much based on the Renaissance
debate, partly occasioned by colonialization , on whether civilized man or the "natural man"
was superior, the advocates of the former presenting the "natural man" as being savage,
intemperate and brutal in contrast to the nobility, self-control and high-mindedness of the
civilized man, the advocates of the latter presenting the "natural man" as being artless,
unaffected, as what Rousseau was later to term the "noble savage" and the civilized man as
being corrupt, affected, merely more adept at cloaking his vices, which were at best more
refined, but nevertheless hardly a reason for pretensions to moral high ground -- Montaigne, in
his famous apologia for the "natural man", observes that it may be arguably more barbaric to
"mangle by tortures and torments a body full of lively sense [...] under pretence of pietie and
religion" than "to roast and eat him after he is dead".

Shakespeare does not go to either extreme in The Tempest. The "natural man" (i.e. Caliban)
is savage, intemperate and brutal, incapable of higher reasoning and lacking the innate
intelligence for nurture to "stick" (as Prospero says in frustration) responding only to something
that in effect could be considered, not inaccurately, as what would in modern terms be called a
form of Pavlovian conditioning. While his portrayal is not totally unsympathetic (cf. the
touching passage in Act III Scene II where he speaks of his "cr[ying] to dream again"; it can also
be argued that Prospero's alighting on the island, installing himself as ruler, and consequently --
albeit not unjustifiably -- depriving Caliban of his rights and liberty is per se somewhat
questionable, depending on how one views colonialization ) he is nevertheless far from being
admirable, far from being a "noble" savage in any way. Admittedly, he does serve to show the
implications of Antonio's conscious choice of evil despite being born of a "good womb" and
having every advantage of mind and upbringing; however, he does not only "indicate corruption
and degeneracy in the civilized world"; that would suggest a certain one-sidedness to the
argument. On the contrary, he also serves as a contrast with the radiant virtue (Miranda and
Ferdinand) and enlightened benevolence (Prospero, albeit more towards the end) of untainted
nobility.

It is in this context that the debate between Art and Nature takes place. Art, using the stricter
definition, refers specifically to Prospero's magic, which he uses to control Nature; this Art,
though not without some questionable aspects, (cf. "graves at my command / Have wak'd their
sleepers", and his excessive threats to punish Ariel in Act I for nothing more than a polite
request that he remember to release him), is chiefly used for benevolent purposes (i.e. for the
restoration and perpetuation of the appropriate social order, for the edification of the others e.g.
Alonso). Even the tempest at the beginning of the play , which as a traditional symbol of chaos
in tragedy, is somewhat sinister, is shown ultimately to have done "no harm". [and created the
foundation for sincere penitence.]

However, while Prospero's Art (in the stricter sense) can be said to imply the self-discipline,
temperance and virtue required to practise it , "Art" can also refer, in a wider sense, to the
enlightened, refined intellect that can only be found with the advantages that civilization
offers -- in which case Antonio's apparent intelligence can be considered, by extension, as
much a form of "Art" as Prospero's, albeit a form perverted for reasons of self-interest and to
serve the cause of evil [good]. In this case, Art, when debased, is infinitely more dangerous and
more subversive of the social hierarchy; as a result, "so much more terrible is the sin of the
nobleman who abases below the natural" -- hence Antonio, unrepentantly silent at the end of
the play, is more sinister than the conspiratorial buffooneries of Caliban, Stephano and
Trinculo put together; for while he "must restore" the dukedom to Prospero, he will presumably
still be in a position to subvert society, not only because of his birth, but also because of his
form of "Art" [good] -- an extraordinary persuasiveness aided by his superior education (when
trying to persuade Sebastian to kill Alonso, he uses Renaissance rhetoric -- an example of how
he abuses "Art" for self-interest) and justified by the Machiavellian concept of virtù . He is,
moreover, the only of the "villains" to be consistently and unflinchingly evil with the full
conscious knowledge that he is choosing evil, and as such is more dangerous, for while the rest
can be brought to an awareness of their mistakes, he already has this awareness, and has no
intention to do otherwise . His behaviour also makes one all the more uneasy because he does
not always have the same apparent motivation as Iago and Edmund, for example, have, being
already in a privileged position.

Nature as personified in Caliban, on the other hand, while serving to "indicate corruption and
degeneracy in the civilized world", is hardly a "virtuous shepherd of normal pastoral". He
behaves in accordance with his instinctual urges, not with any sort of reasoning above that of the
most elementary, and is incapable of understanding "virtue" as a concept. However, his
behaviour is comparatively less worrying than Antonio's. He does not have power, and is, or at
least will not be when back in Milan, hardly in a position to alter the social hierarchy
significantly. Similarly in the case of Stephano and Trinculo; though they (though perhaps to a
lesser extent) are also bound to "Nature", there is not much danger from a butler and a jester
particularly susceptible to inebriation. All three, moreover, lack Antonio's intellect, and, being
without either version of "Art", do not pose a serious threat, since they can be easily
controlled. Their "natural" tendencies are, moreover, less distressing than Antonio's taste for
evil, since none has had the advantages of birth and breeding; Caliban, in fact, is congenitally
disadvantaged by fact of his parentage alone, being born from a union of an incubus and a witch,
and therefore not even totally "human", so to speak. In any case, while they can be accused of
being ill-behaved and ill-natured at worst, they certainly cannot be accused of being evil, as
Antonio can. This fact may perhaps partially account for Prospero's acknowledgement of
Caliban at the end of the play and his relatively cold treatment of Antonio, whom he forgives,
but does not speak much to. [good]

As such, The Tempest presents "Nature" as being far from the idealistic, idyllic image created by
Montaigne and those who thought similarly. However, if "Art" is taken in the wider sense, it can
also be equivocal, since it is extremely dangerous if misused. If used properly, however, it can
control Nature and curb its baser urges or at least prevent them from being carried out.
Nevertheless, while the need for control over Nature is asserted continually, the ending suggests
that Art must ultimately come to terms with Nature [yes!] (hence Prospero's "this thing of
darkness I / Acknowledge mine"); for while Caliban's limitations are apparent, his wish to
improve himself is promising, and his new relationship with Prospero seems to be more stable
and more reassuring than the resentment-filled and extremely uneasy jailor-prisoner / master-
slave relationship shown earlier.
 The Tempest - Art vs. Nature
Written by Sia Rouh Phin, 2A13A, 13 May 1996.

"... the natural man functions like the virtuous shepherd of normal pastoral, to indicate
corruption and degeneracy in the civilized world; if the natural man is a brute, so much
more terrible is the sin of the nobleman who abases below the natural." Consider the
debate between Art and Nature in the play The Tempest.

In The Tempest, Art is that which is composed of grace, civility and virtue. It is represented by
Prospero, the other members of the nobility who belong to the court party and their servants.
The world of the court is synonymous with the world of Art in the play. In contrast, Nature is
bestial, brutish and evil; and manifest in the form of Caliban and the natural world. With two
such extremes brought together, debate between the two is inevitable.

There are two opposing views of the natural. One sees the natural as that which is corrupted by
man while the other regards it as that which is defective in itself and must be corrected by
nurture. Montaigne's essay, Of Cannibals, is an undisputed source of the novel which supports
the former view. Montaigne believed that a society without the civilised 'additives' of law,
custom and artificial restraints would be a happy one. Gonzalo's talk of his "commonwealth"
mirrors this opinion in the play. Shakespeare agrees more with the latter view which is
propounded by Aristotle in the following lines, "men...who are as much inferior to others as the
body is to the soul...are slaves by nature, and it is advantageous for them always to be under
government" and Caliban is Shakespeare's example of this.

There are also two opposing views of the nobility. The first belief is that nobility comes by birth,
and hence one of noble birth is virtuous by extension. Shakespeare supports the second view
which sees nobility as the perfection of nature in each thing. Nobility is shown by the manners
and merits of the individual. Thus, among those of better birth, there are those who might beget
an evil nature and noblemen can do wrong because they are free to choose. Though gentle birth
predisposes man to virtue, it is not necessary to virtue. It cannot be uniformly maintained that
where there is high birth, there is virtue.

In the play, Shakespeare has portrayed neither Nature nor Art as perfect but as having a complex
relationship where one is reflected in the other. While Nature calls forth the authoritative power
of Art to correct it, Art can descend to, and even sink below, the level of Nature.

Caliban, the natural man, is a representative of Nature in many ways. His name itself fascinates
regardless of whether it is an anagram of 'cannibal' or if it originates from "Carib", which is a
term for the savage inhabitants of the New World. This links him with Indian natives, and like
them he is amiable at first but treacherous under provocation. He is described in the Dramatis
Personae as "a salvage and deformed slave". As he is "salvage", unchastity is a conventional
attribute. He is "deformed" -- "a freckled whelp hag-born, not honoured with/ A human shape",
because he is a product of a sexual union between a witch and an incubus. Not only is Caliban
natural in origin, he is also natural in character. He exists at the most rudimentary level of pain
and pleasure, making him a natural slave. Lust and lechery are all that he knows because love is
beyond his depth. Although he appreciates music, it charms him as it does a beast without
reason.

In contrast, the court party are used to grace, civility and every refined comfort. Able to reason,
analyse, feel and sense. Prospero himself is a nobleman and "the right Duke of Milan". As a
duke, he naturally assumes the right to rule the island -- "to be lord on't". Not only does
Prospero have the seed of nobility, he is also wrapped up in the pursuit of knowledge. He is such
an accomplished mage that he gains special powers -- his Art. His powers are magnified by the
control he has gained because of his ability to place reason over passion. Prospero's highly
developed mind also allows him to hatch a plan to give the court party a chance to learn.

Such is the manifestation of Nature in The Tempest, and such the cultured representation of Art.
Debate between the two takes the form of a series of antitheses with Caliban frequently
recurring as the representative of nature which allows comparison between the two worlds.
Caliban is a measure of the incredible superiority of the world of Art and also a measure of its
corruption and degeneracy.

In terms of physical appearances, the world of Art is indisputably superior. The noble (and often
virtuous) are beautiful while the vile are ugly. Physical appearance is an index of a character's
nobility or vileness. Caliban is deformed as a result of evil magic and "with age his body uglier
grows". Caliban seems even more loathly in the presence of Ferdinand and Miranda's
comeliness. Miranda is especially beautiful because the divine quality of nobility and her virtue
illuminates her physical body such that both Ferdinand and Alonso take her for a goddess. This
serves to emphasise the incomparability of the world of Art to the world of Nature in terms of
physical appearances.

In the practice of magic, Prospero's Art is the antithesis of the black magic of Sycorax.
Prospero's divine magic achieves supremacy over the natural world through the exercise of
virtuous knowledge gleaned through studious observation. Requiring virtue, learning and
temperance of its practitioner to succeed, it stands for the world of better qualities and achieves
the restoration of harmony at human and political levels. Prospero only deals with spirits high in
the scale of goodness like Ariel -- "an airy spirit". Symbolically, this Art of Prospero's has
control over Nature in the form of Caliban. Distinct from it is Sycorax's black magic which has
limited power and can only pronounce "grand hests" or command the lower order of spirits. Yet,
Sycorax was powerful enough to trap Ariel. Nonetheless, Prospero's beneficent magic far
outshines Sycorax's evil one.

The contrast of the lustful incontinence of natural man with the love and restraint of the
nobleman once again displays the incredible superiority of the world of Art. Caliban is naturally
lustful as seen in his attempt to defile Miranda. This corroborates the belief that the natural is
often sexually promiscuous. Ferdinand markedly differs from Caliban in his insistence that his
desires are under control despite Miranda's exceptionally frank professions of love. As
Ferdinand assures Prospero, "The white cold virgin snow upon my heart/ Abates the ardour of
my liver". Ferdinand is able to restrain his appetite in the hope of enjoying "quiet days, fair issue
and long life".

Unfortunately, the continence of the world of Art is marred by Stephano's unchaste designs.
Stephano's lustful nature reveals itself when he is tempted into murdering Prospero in the hope
of getting a "brave...lass" who "will become [his] bed". Even where the world of Art is supposed
to have preeminence, it can be seen that members of that world can sink to the level of Nature.
Perhaps this can be accounted for by the fact that Stephano is not a member of the nobility but
just one of their servants.

The disparity of birth between the world of Art and Nature seems to be an impassable abyss.
However, Edward Phillips offers some hope, "want of nature ( the nature of nobility acquired by
birth) can be partially supplied by education". Thus, Shakespeare carefully sets up a comparison
between Miranda and Caliban who both have Prospero as their tutor. Miranda is endowed with
the seed of noble race, blessed with the benefit of education and equipped with the ability to
learn. As Prospero proudly tells her, "...here/ Have I, thy schoolmaster, made thee more profit/
Than other princess' can that have more time/ For vainer hours, and tutors not so careful". In
Miranda, both the qualities of nobility and the ability to learn are united in happy conjunction.
But Caliban has neither and nurture appears to be not only useless but harmful to him. Prospero
laments that Caliban is "A devil, a born devil, on whose nature/ Nurture can never stick; on
whom my pains/ Humanely taken, all, all lost, quite lost". Instead, Prospero's attempts to
cultivate Caliban has only brought out in the worst in Caliban, such as lust for Miranda and
discontent at his inferior position. More significantly, he has learnt to abuse the gift of language
which can be seen in his biting return to Miranda, "You taught me language; and my profit on't/
Is I know how to curse". However, Caliban is not totally incapable of learning at a sensory level
of pain. After Prospero's punishment, Caliban knows he must never touch Miranda although he
does not understand why. Consequently, primacy of the world of Art over Nature is not
complete, especially since Prospero fell from his kingdom because of an inordinate thirst for
education and learning. This indicates that learning is not necessarily a desirable thing.
Fortunately, Prospero compensates for this as it is his learning which eventually gives him the
means to return to Milan.

There are also points in the play where Shakespeare uses Caliban to show how much baser
corruption of the world of Art can be than the bestiality of Nature. Stephano and Trinculo are
servants who belong to the world of Art. Yet once they are away from the watchful eye of their
master, they lose all discipline and control, beginning to drink freely of the king's wine. This is
not unlike Caliban who cannot wait to be out of the service of Prospero. Won over by the
"celestial liquor", Caliban would take Stephano for his master and the three treacherous servants
merrily drink themselves into drunkenness. However, here Nature shows itself to be superior to
Art for Stephano and Trinculo are persuaded to follow the leadership of Caliban in a plot to
murder Prospero. But Caliban soon perceives Stephano's infirmity of purpose and scorns both
Stephano and Trinculo for being distracted from their mission by such material things as fancy
clothes. Here indeed we can see men of the world of Art stooping below natural man.

However, the name of the world of Art is most sullied by the ambition of Antonio. Antonio is
part of the courtier stock which is endowed with grace and nurtured in refinement through
centuries in the world of Art. But though it is a civilised world, it allows freedom of action.
Thus, it is possible for Antonio to indulge in an act of treason, to usurp the dukedom of Milan
from his brother. This action of Antonio's is contrary to the spirit of the world of Art. That is not
all. Antonio has not changed with the passage of time. Instead, he seems to have degenerated
still more for there is a parallel between Antonio's treacherous behaviour with that of Caliban's
in their plots to murder Alonso and Prospero respectively. While Antonio persuades Sebastian to
secure accession to the throne by killing off all opposition (i.e. Alonso and Gonzalo), Caliban
leads Stephano and Trinculo in a scheme to murder Prospero in his sleep. The malicious
ambition of Antonio sinks him to the level of Caliban, and to even lower levels. As stated in the
essay title, since "natural man is a brute, so much more terrible is the sin of the nobleman who
abases himself below the natural".

Antonio is a degenerate nobleman. As Miranda points out to Prospero, "Good wombs have
borne bad sons". Juxtaposed with Caliban the vileness of his conduct as opposed to the nobility
of his birth is sorely felt. Being a nobleman, Antonio is predisposed to virtuous conduct. Yet, he
is impervious to the actions of grace and alienates himself from Prospero's forgiveness. In
contrast, Caliban has no choice but to be vile. In the words of Aristotle, "bestial man has no
sense of right and wrong, and therefore sees no difference between good and evil". But Caliban
knows better than Antonio that it is imprudent to resist grace and he declares it, "I'll be wise
hereafter/ And seek for grace." Despite the benefit of birth and education, Antonio degrades
himself below of those who live unaided at the level or nature.

To conclude, the ongoing debate between Art and Nature in The Tempest establishes the
incredible superiority of the world of Art over nature and also that Art is not so far above Nature
that it cannot stoop below it. As such, one has to agree with Aristotle's conclusion that the state
of bestial man is "less guilty and more hopeless than those of incontinence and malice since it
cannot be improved".

A Discussion of Art and Nature in The Tempest

In The Tempest, Art is that which is composed of grace, civility and virtue. It is represented by Prospero, the other
members of the nobility who belong to the court party and their servants. The world of the court is synonymous with
the world of Art in the play. In contrast, Nature is bestial, brutish and evil; and manifest in the form of Caliban and the
natural world. With two such extremes brought together, debate between the two is inevitable.

There are two opposing viewsof the natural. One sees the natural as that which is corrupted by man while the
other regards it as that which is defective in itself and must be corrected by nurture. Montaigne's essay, Of Cannibals,
is an undisputed source of the novel which supports the former view. Montaigne believed that a society without the
civilised 'additives' of law, custom and artificial restraints would be a happy one. Gonzalo's talk of his "commonwealth"
mirrors this opinion in the play. Shakespeare agrees more with the latter view which is propounded by Aristotle in the
following lines, "men...who are as much inferior to others as the body is to the soul...are slaves by nature, and it is
advantageous for them always to be under government" and Caliban is Shakespeare's example of this.

There are also two opposing views of the nobility. The first belief is that nobility comes by birth, and hence one
of noble birth is virtuous by extension. Shakespeare supports the second view which sees nobility as the perfection of
nature in each thing. Nobility is shown by the manners and merits of the individual. Thus, among those of better birth,
there are those who might beget an evil nature and noblemen can do wrong because they are free to choose. Though
gentle birth predisposes man to virtue, it is not necessary to virtue. It cannot be uniformly maintained that where there
is high birth, there is virtue.

In the play, Shakespeare has portrayed neither Nature nor Art as perfect but as having a complex relationship
where one is reflected in the other. While Nature calls forth the authoritative power of Art to correct it, Art can descend
to, and even sink below, the level of Nature.
 Caliban, the natural man, is a representative of Nature in many ways. His name itself fascinates regardless of
whether it is an anagram of 'cannibal' or if it originates from "Carib", which is a term for the savage inhabitants of the
New World. This links him with Indian natives, and like them he is amiable at first but treacherous under provocation.
He is described in the Dramatis Personae as "a salvage and deformed slave". As he is "salvage", unchastity is a
conventional attribute. He is "deformed" -- "a freckled whelp hag-born, not honoured with/ A human shape", because
he is a product of a sexual union between a witch and an incubus. Not only is Caliban natural in origin, he is also
natural in character. He exists at the most rudimentary level of pain and pleasure, making him a natural slave. Lust
and lechery are all that he knows because love is beyond his depth. Although he appreciates music, it charms him as
it does a beast without reason.

In contrast, the court party are used to grace, civility and every refined comfort. Able to reason, analyse, feel
and sense. Prospero himself is a nobleman and "the right Duke of Milan". As a duke, he naturally assumes the right to
rule the island -- "to be lord on't". Not only does Prospero have the seed of nobility, he is also wrapped up in the
pursuit of knowledge. He is such an accomplished mage that he gains special powers -- his Art. His powers are
magnified by the control he has gained because of his ability to place reason over passion. Prospero's highly
developed mind also allows him to hatch a plan to give the court party a chance to learn.

Such is the manifestation of Nature in The Tempest, and such the cultured representation of Art. Debate
between the two takes the form of a series of antitheses with Caliban frequently recurring as the representative of
nature which allows comparison between the two worlds. Caliban is a measure of the incredible superiority of the
world of Art and also a measure of its corruption and degeneracy.

In terms of physical appearances, the world of Art is indisputably superior. The noble (and often virtuous) are
beautiful while the vile are ugly. Physical appearance is an index of a character's nobility or vileness. Caliban is
deformed as a result of evil magic and "with age his body uglier grows". Caliban seems even more loathly in the
presence of Ferdinand and Miranda's comeliness. Miranda is especially beautiful because the divine quality of nobility
and her virtue illuminates her physical body such that both Ferdinand and Alonso take her for a goddess. This serves
to emphasise the incomparability of the world of Art to the world of Nature in terms of physical appearances.

In the practice of magic, Prospero's Art is the antithesis of the black magic of Sycorax. Prospero's divine magic
achieves supremacy over the natural world through the exercise of virtuous knowledge gleaned through studious
observation. Requiring virtue, learning and temperance of its practitioner to succeed, it stands for the world of better
qualities and achieves the restoration of harmony at human and political levels. Prospero only deals with spirits high in
the scale of goodness like Ariel -- "an airy spirit". Symbolically, this Art of Prospero's has control over Nature in the
form of Caliban. Distinct from it is Sycorax's black magic which has limited power and can only pronounce "grand
hests" or command the lower order of spirits. Yet, Sycorax was powerful enough to trap Ariel. Nonetheless, Prospero's
beneficent magic far outshines Sycorax's evil one.

The contrast of the lustful incontinence of natural man with the love and restraint of the nobleman once again
displays the incredible superiority of the world of Art. Caliban is naturally lustful as seen in his attempt to defile
Miranda. This corroborates the belief that the natural is often sexually promiscuous. Ferdinand markedly differs from
Caliban in his insistence that his desires are under control despite Miranda's exceptionally frank professions of love.
As Ferdinand assures Prospero, "The white cold virgin snow upon my heart/ Abates the ardour of my liver". Ferdinand
is able to restrain his appetite in the hope of enjoying "quiet days, fair issue and long life".
 Unfortunately, the continence of the world of Art is marred by Stephano's unchaste designs. Stephano's lustful
nature reveals itself when he is tempted into murdering Prospero in the hope of getting a "brave...lass" who "will
become [his] bed". Even where the world of Art is supposed to have preeminence, it can be seen that members of that
world can sink to the level of Nature. Perhaps this can be accounted for by the fact that Stephano is not a member of
the nobility but just one of their servants.

The disparity of birth between the world of Art and Nature seems to be an impassable abyss. However,
Edward Phillips offers some hope, "want of nature ( the nature of nobility acquired by birth) can be partially supplied by
education". Thus, Shakespeare carefully sets up a comparison between Miranda and Caliban who both have
Prospero as their tutor. Miranda is endowed with the seed of noble race, blessed with the benefit of education and
equipped with the ability to learn. As Prospero proudly tells her, "...here/ Have I, thy schoolmaster, made thee more
profit/ Than other princess' can that have more time/ For vainer hours, and tutors not so careful". In Miranda, both the
qualities of nobility and the ability to learn are united in happy conjunction. But Caliban has neither and nurture
appears to be not only useless but harmful to him. Prospero laments that Caliban is "A devil, a born devil, on whose
nature/ Nurture can never stick; on whom my pains/ Humanely taken, all, all lost, quite lost". Instead, Prospero's
attempts to cultivate Caliban has only brought out in the worst in Caliban, such as lust for Miranda and discontent at
his inferior position. More significantly, he has learnt to abuse the gift of language which can be seen in his biting
return to Miranda, "You taught me language; and my profit on't/ Is I know how to curse". However, Caliban is not
totally incapable of learning at a sensory level of pain. After Prospero's punishment, Caliban knows he must never
touch Miranda although he does not understand why. Consequently, primacy of the world of Art over Nature is not
complete, especially since Prospero fell from his kingdom because of an inordinate thirst for education and learning.
This indicates that learning is not necessarily a desirable thing. Fortunately, Prospero compensates for this as it is his
learning which eventually gives him the means to return to Milan.

There are also points in the play where Shakespeare uses Caliban to show how much baser corruption of the
world of Art can be than the bestiality of Nature. Stephano and Trinculo are servants who belong to the world of Art.
Yet once they are away from the watchful eye of their master, they lose all discipline and control, beginning to drink
freely of the king's wine. This is not unlike Caliban who cannot wait to be out of the service of Prospero. Won over by
the "celestial liquor", Caliban would take Stephano for his master and the three treacherous servants merrily drink
themselves into drunkenness. However, here Nature shows itself to be superior to Art for Stephano and Trinculo are
persuaded to follow the leadership of Caliban in a plot to murder Prospero. But Caliban soon perceives Stephano's
infirmity of purpose and scorns both Stephano and Trinculo for being distracted from their mission by such material
things as fancy clothes. Here indeed we can see men of the world of Art stooping below natural man.

However, the name of the world of Art is most sullied by the ambition of Antonio. Antonio is part of the courtier
stock which is endowed with grace and nurtured in refinement through centuries in the world of Art. But though it is a
civilised world, it allows freedom of action. Thus, it is possible for Antonio to indulge in an act of treason, to usurp the
dukedom of Milan from his brother. This action of Antonio's is contrary to the spirit of the world of Art. That is not all.
Antonio has not changed with the passage of time. Instead, he seems to have degenerated still more for there is a
parallel between Antonio's treacherous behaviour with that of Caliban's in their plots to murder Alonso and Prospero
respectively. While Antonio persuades Sebastian to secure accession to the throne by killing off all opposition (i.e.
Alonso and Gonzalo), Caliban leads Stephano and Trinculo in a scheme to murder Prospero in his sleep. The
malicious ambition of Antonio sinks him to the level of Caliban, and to even lower levels. As stated in the essay title,
since "natural man is a brute, so much more terrible is the sin of the nobleman who abases himself below the
natural".

Antonio is a degenerate nobleman. As Miranda points out to Prospero, "Good wombs have borne bad sons".
Juxtaposed with Caliban the vileness of his conduct as opposed to the nobility of his birth is sorely felt. Being a
nobleman, Antonio is predisposed to virtuous conduct. Yet, he is impervious to the actions of grace and alienates
himself from Prospero's forgiveness. In contrast, Caliban has no choice but to be vile. In the words of Aristotle, "bestial
man has no sense of right and wrong, and therefore sees no difference between good and evil". But Caliban knows
better than Antonio that it is imprudent to resist grace and he declares it, "I'll be wise hereafter/ And seek for grace."
Despite the benefit of birth and education, Antonio degrades himself below of those who live unaided at the level or
nature.

To conclude, the ongoing debate between Art and Nature in The Tempest establishes the incredible
superiority of the world of Art over nature and also that Art is not so far above Nature that it cannot stoop below it. As
such, one has to agree with Aristotle's conclusion that the state of bestial man is "less guilty and more hopeless than
those of incontinence and malice since it cannot be improved".

Works Cited and Consulted:

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. "A Reading of the Tempest ". The Tempest. New York: Signet Classic. 1994.

Davidson, Frank. "The Tempest: An Interpretation." In The Tempest: A Casebook. Ed. D.J. Palmer. London:
Macmillan & Co. Ltd., 1968. 225.

Kermode, Frank. Introduction. The Tempest. By William Shakespeare. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1958. xlii.

Art vs. Nature in The Tempest

The debate between Art and Nature in The Tempest is very much based on the Renaissance debate, on whether
“civilized man” or the "natural man" was superior. The advocates of “civilized man” presenting the "natural man" as
being savage, intemperate and brutal in contrast to the nobility, self-control and high-mindedness of the “civilized
man”. The advocates of "natural man" presenting him as what Rousseau was later to term the "noble savage" and the
civilized man as being corrupt, affected, merely more adept at cloaking his vices, which were at best more refined, but
nevertheless hardly a reason for pretensions to moral high ground. Montaigne, in his famous apologia for the "natural
man", observes that it may be arguably more barbaric to "mangle by tortures and torments a body full of lively sense
[...] under pretence of pietie and religion" than "to roast and eat him after he is dead".

Shakespeare does not go to either extreme in The Tempest. The "natural man" (i.e. Caliban) is savage,
intemperate and brutal, incapable of higher reasoning and lacking the innate intelligence for nurture to "stick" (as
Prospero says in frustration) responding only to something that in effect could be considered, not inaccurately, as
what would in modern terms be called a form of Pavlovian conditioning. While his portrayal is not totally unsympathetic
(cf. the touching passage in Act III Scene II where he speaks of his "cr [ying] to dream again", it can also be argued
that Prospero's alighting on the island, installing himself as ruler, and consequently -- albeit not unjustifiably --
depriving Caliban of his rights and liberty is per se somewhat questionable, depending on how one views colonization)
he is nevertheless far from being admirable, far from being a "noble" savage in any way. Admittedly, he does serve to
show the implications of Antonio's conscious choice of evil despite being born of a "good womb" and having every
advantage of mind and upbringing. However, he does not only "indicate corruption and degeneracy in the civilized
world"; that would suggest a certain one-sidedness to the argument. On the contrary, he also serves as a contrast with
the radiant virtue (Miranda and Ferdinand) and enlightened benevolence (Prospero, albeit more towards the end) of
untainted nobility.

It is in this context that the debate between Art and Nature takes place. Art, using the stricter definition, refers
specifically to Prospero's magic, which he uses to control Nature; this Art, though not without some questionable
aspects, (cf. "graves at my command / Have wak'd their sleepers", and his excessive threats to punish Ariel in Act I for
nothing more than a polite request that he remember to release him), is chiefly used for benevolent purposes (i.e. for
the restoration and perpetuation of the appropriate social order, for the edification of the others e.g. Alonso). Even the
tempest at the beginning of the play, which as a traditional symbol of chaos in tragedy is somewhat sinister, is shown
ultimately to have done "no harm" and has created the foundation for sincere penitence.

However, while Prospero's Art (in the stricter sense) can be said to imply the self-discipline, temperance and
virtue required to practice it, "Art" can also refer, in a wider sense, to the enlightened, refined intellect that can only be
found with the advantages that civilization offers -- in which case Antonio's apparent intelligence can be considered,
by extension, as much a form of "Art" as Prospero's, albeit a form perverted for reasons of self-interest and to serve
the cause of evil. In this case, Art, when debased, is infinitely more dangerous and more subversive of the social
hierarchy; as a result, "so much more terrible is the sin of the nobleman who abases below the natural" -- hence
Antonio, unrepentantly silent at the end of the play, is more sinister than the conspiratorial buffooneries of Caliban,
Stephano and Trinculo put together; for while he "must restore" the dukedom to Prospero, he will presumably still be
in a position to subvert society, not only because of his birth, but also because of his form of "Art" -- an extraordinary
persuasiveness aided by his superior education (when trying to persuade Sebastian to kill Alonso, he uses
Renaissance rhetoric -- an example of how he abuses "Art" for self-interest) and justified by the Machiavellian concept
of virtù. He is, moreover, the only of the "villains" to be consistently and unflinchingly evil with the full conscious
knowledge that he is choosing evil, and as such is more dangerous. While the rest can be brought to an awareness of
their mistakes, he already has this awareness, and has no intention to do otherwise. His behavior also makes one all
the more uneasy because he does not always have the same apparent motivation as Iago and Edmund, for example,
being already in a privileged position.

Nature as personified in Caliban, on the other hand, while serving to "indicate corruption and degeneracy in
the civilized world", is hardly a "virtuous shepherd of normal pastoral". He behaves in accordance with his instinctual
urges, not with any sort of reasoning above that of the most elementary, and is incapable of understanding "virtue" as
a concept. However, his behavior is comparatively less worrying than Antonio's. He does not have power, and is, or at
least will not be when back in Milan, hardly in a position to alter the social hierarchy significantly. Similarly in the case
of Stephano and Trinculo, though they are also bound to "Nature", there is not much danger from a butler and a jester
particularly susceptible to inebriation. All three, moreover, lack Antonio's intellect, and, being without either version of
"Art", do not pose a serious threat, since they can be easily controlled. Their "natural" tendencies are, moreover, less
distressing than Antonio's taste for evil, since none has had the advantages of birth and breeding; Caliban, in fact, is
congenitally disadvantaged by fact of his parentage alone, being born from a union of an incubus and a witch, and
therefore not even totally "human", so to speak. In any case, while they can be accused of being ill behaved and ill
natured at worst, they certainly cannot be accused of being evil, as Antonio can. This fact may perhaps partially
account for Prospero's acknowledgement of Caliban at the end of the play and his relatively cold treatment of Antonio,
whom he forgives, but does not speak much to.

As such, The Tempest presents "Nature" as being far from the idealistic, idyllic image created by Montaigne
and those who thought similarly. However, if "Art" is taken in the wider sense, it can also be equivocal, since it is
extremely dangerous if misused. If used properly, however, it can control Nature and curb its baser urges or at least
prevent them from being carried out. Nevertheless, while the need for control over Nature is asserted continually, the
ending suggests that Art must ultimately come to terms with Nature (hence Prospero's "this thing of darkness I /
Acknowledge mine"); for while Caliban's limitations are apparent, his wish to improve himself is promising, and his
new relationship with Prospero seems to be more stable and more reassuring than the resentment-filled and
extremely uneasy jailor-prisoner / master-slave relationship shown earlier

The Tempest as an Exploration of the Nature of Art

By way of introducing the first popular interpretative approach to the Tempest, I want to begin with a very obvious
point. The Tempest is a very theatrical play, that is, it is obviously a wonderful vehicle for displaying the full resources
of the theatre: dramatic action, special effects, music, magic, monsters, dancing, storms, drunken humour, and so on.
Anyone who wants a Shakespearean play to produce mainly as an extravagant theatrical tour de force (say, a rock
and roll extravaganza or an opera) would turn naturally to this play, which, among Shakespeare's works, is rivaled
only by Midsummer Night's Dream in this respect. And a number of productions, past and modern, have stressed
mainly that element, without bothering about anything else. Musical adaptations of The Tempest have a long tradition.
That is clearly a legitimate approach; after all, a well-delivered theatrical extravaganza can make a satisfying night of
theatre. And it is clear that The Tempest does depend for much of its effectiveness on a wide range of special effects--
sound, lighting, fantastic visions, a whole realm of "magic" (it may well have been written in response to the changing
theatrical tastes of an audience that was requiring more theatrical effects in the presentation of dramatic productions).
But I think there's more to the theatricality of the play than just its style. In my view, a central issue of the Tempest is
an exploration into the nature of theatre itself.

For those who have read a certain amount of Shakespeare, the theatrical theme gets considerable impetus from the
fact that The Tempest seems, in some ways, to revisit many earlier Shakespearean themes and characters, so that at
times it comes across almost as a final summary look at some very familiar material, something Stephen Greenblatt
calls "a kind of echo chamber of Shakespearean motifs":

Its story of loss and recovery and its air of wonder link it closely to the group of late plays that modern editors
generally call "romances" (Pericles, The Winter's Tale, Cymbeline), but it resonates as well with issues that haunted
Shakespeare's imagination throughout his career: the painful necessity for a father to let his daughter go (Othello,
King Lear); the treacherous betrayal of a legitimate ruler (Richard II, Julius Caesar, Hamlet, Macbeth); the murderous
hatred of one brother for another (Richard III, As You Like It, Hamlet, King Lear); the passage from court society to the
wilderness and the promise of a return (A Midsummer Night's Dream, As You Like It); the wooing of a young heiress in
ignorance of her place in the social hierarchy (Twelfth Night, Pericles, The Winter's Tale); the dream of manipulating
others by means of art, especially by staging miniature plays-within-plays (1 Henry IV, Much Ado About Nothing,
Hamlet); the threat of a radical loss of identity (The Comedy of Errors, Richard II, King Lear); the relation between
nature and nurture (Pericles, The Winter's Tale); the harnessing of magical powers (. . . [2 Henry VI], A Midsummer
Night's Dream, Macbeth).

So, given this rich allusiveness to other plays, at the end of a course like this there is a natural tendency to want to link
the concerns of the play with a celebration of the wonderful achievement we have been studying so far.

But there is more to this approach to the play than simply nostalgia. To give you a sense of what I mean, let me
mention two questions that puzzled me about this play when I first read it. The first is this: If Prospero's power is so
effective against his opponents as it appears to be, then why didn't he use it back in Milan to avoid having to be exiled
in the first place? And the second one, which arises naturally from that first one, is this: Given that Prospero is so keen
on his magic and takes such delight in it and that it gives him so much power, why does he abandon it before
returning to Milan?

I puzzled over these questions until I came to what seems to me the most satisfying answer. It is a very obvious one:
the magic does not work in Milan; it is effective only on the island, away from the Machiavellian world of the court,
where plotting against each other, even against one's own family, for the sake of political power is the order of the day
and where, if you take your mind off the political realities for very long, you may find yourself in a boat with a load of
books heading to an unknown exile. Prospero's magic can only become effective in a special place, a world of spirits,
of illusion, song, and enchantment, on a magic island--in other words, in the theatre.

After all, look what happens in this play. A bunch of political types and all their attendants (sailors, butlers, and so on)
from the busy court of Naples and Milan are lured away from their power political business into a world of illusion,
where they are led around by strange powers (above all, music and apparitions) they do not fully comprehend but
whom they cannot resist until they all come together inside Prospero's magic circle. Prospero controls the entire
experiment through his ability to create and sustain illusions. He is throughout the master of the action, and there is
never any suspense (well, almost none), since he has such absolute control of human beings through his control of
what they see and hear and experience.

[There's a similar sense in the recent film Shakespeare in Love, where daily life in London is often a hard business,
with arranged marriages to brutal men, hateful money lenders, and so on; all that changes in the theatre, where
miraculously things always come right, at least for a time, even money lenders become enthusiastically cooperative
and supportive and a love impossible in the world outside can thrive]

If we accept this possibility as an interpretative metaphor, then we need to explore how that might make sense of
other elements in the play. Remember that in such questions the Principle of Inclusiveness is an important guiding
rule: the interpretation should make sense of as much of the play as possible, and in any conflict between rival
interpretative possibilities one important criterion for judgment is the adequacy of each interpretation at providing a
coherent and consistent sense of as much of the play as possible.

In order to pursue this idea of the Tempest as an celebratory exploration of the nature of theatrical art, I want to turn
for a while to what happens in the play.

Nature and Art

The Tempest shows the distinction between the natural man, Caliban, and the civilized man, Prospero. Shakespeare
demonstrates, by the examples of Prospero, Ferdinand and Miranda, and by those of Sebastian, Stephano and
Trinculo how social, civilized man may rise above or sink beneath the savage. Caliban is a kind of yardstick by which
we can measure others. Caliban is not merely a slave in fact, but justly so. His vileness is not chosen but is his nature;
Antonio, on the other hand, embraces wickedness for his own gain, although he knows the moral law.

Gonzalo, as Act V shows, has never approved of what was done to Prospero. In his speech in II, i (on the ideal
commonwealth, echoing Montaigne's essay Of Cannibals) he expresses distaste for the more cynical and divisive
features of government and society - exploitation of labour, expropriation of land and extremes of luxury, poverty,
drunkenness, gluttony. Contrast this with the positive way in which Prospero makes the island more comfortable and
delightful.

Back to top

On his arrival on the island, Prospero tries to educate Caliban; he has no intention to enslave him, but sees him as his
inferior in respect only of learning. But Caliban is able only to learn Prospero's language to utter powerless curses; he
cannot take "any print of goodness" - his attempted rape of the child Miranda is reported to the audience as
unambiguous evidence of Caliban's lack of conscience or soul. Again we see his degeneracy in his knowing his
curses have no power yet persisting in uttering them, and inviting "cramps" as punishment. Antonio also claims to
have no conscience - in some ways this is more shocking, as he has the outward beauty and eloquence of the
civilized man.

As the play is a pastoral romance it is permissible for physical beauty or ugliness to represent beauty or ugliness of
spirit. So Caliban is a "salvage and deformed slave" while Sycorax, through her wickedness, "was grown into a hoop".
Conversely, Miranda and Ferdinand appear god-like each to the other. To Miranda's untutored eye all the Milanese
and Neapolitan nobles appear beautiful, but then she is comparing them with Caliban. This beauty results from an
essential nobility which is tainted but not effaced by behaviour such as that of Antonio.

Back to top

Prospero's magic is not simply more powerful than that of Sycorax; it is stronger because of its radically different
nature. Sycorax is a goetist, her magic as potent as the demon, Setebos, whom she serves. It is usually strongest
when most malevolent, although her life was spared for "one thing she did" for Argier. Her imprisonment of Ariel in the
cloven pine is typically cruel and destructive, "a torment...which Sycorax could not again undo".

Prospero repeatedly refers to his "Art": his magic is creative, of enormous power, as Ariel harnesses the elements. He
is a theurgist, who does locally and swiftly what the natural universe or the supernatural power in it is striving to do
always. He does not act for his own advantage but in order to produce what is good. In some ways Prospero's Art is a
desperate remedy to a desperate situation: it is invoked to free himself from passion, the baser promptings of
unregenerate nature, to create perfect self-discipline; for others his Art is used to restore harmony to human
relationships and political hierarchies. Having done so, he can abjure "this rough magic", assured that it will not be
needed again.

Back to top

Prospero's Art controls nature; it requires of the artist virtue and temperance if his experiment is to succeed; and it
thus stands for the world of the better natures and its qualities. This is the world which is closed to Caliban...; the world
of mind and the possibilities of liberating the soul, not the world of sense, whether that be represented as coarsely
natural or charmingly voluptuous. Art is not only a beneficent magic in contrast to an evil one; it is the ordination of
civility, the control of appetite, the transformation of nature by breeding and learning; it is, even, in a sense, the means
of Grace. Prospero is, therefore, the representative of Art, as Caliban is of Nature. As a mage he controls nature; as a
prince he conquers the passions which had excluded him from his kingdom and overthrown law; as a scholar he
repairs his loss of Eden; as a man he learns to temper his passions, an achievement essential to success in any of the
other activities.
Frank Kermode, The Arden Shakespeare, The Tempest, xlviii

Back to top

Art and Nature as contrasting principles can, then, be discerned in comparing the education of Miranda with what
passes for education in Caliban; Ferdinand's chaste love and Caliban's lust; Sycorax's lesser and Prospero's greater
magic; the intemperance and folly of Stephano and Trinculo against the self-control of Ferdinand and Prospero, and
the latter's wisdom.

Back to top

Theatrical qualities

For a detailed reading of the theatrical qualities of the play, see the comments on the key scenes, under the heading
Theatrical Presentation. But in answering questions about Shakespeare's stagecraft generally, you should consider
the following:

 the comic interludes (mostly involving Trinculo, Stephano and Caliban;

 Caliban, Ariel and the spirits;
 magic and music; the sea, the tempest and the island;
 Prospero's books and staff;
 the language of the play.

art 1 (ärt)
n.
1. Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.
2.
a. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that
affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
b. The study of these activities.
c. The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.
3. High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
4. A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
5. A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
6.
a. A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
b. A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.
7.
a. Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
b. Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: "Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice" (Joyce
Carol Oates).
8.
a. arts Artful devices, stratagems, and tricks.
b. Artful contrivance; cunning.
9. Printing Illustrative material.

[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin ars, art-; see ar- in Indo-European roots.]
Synonyms: art1, craft, expertise, knack, know-how, technique
Quotations
"Art is a jealous mistress" [Ralph Waldo Emerson Conduct of Life]
"All art constantly aspires towards the condition of music" [Walter Pater Studies in the History of the Renaissance]
"Art is a lie that makes us realise the truth" [Pablo Picasso]
"Life is short, the art long" [Hippocrates Aphorisms]
"Art does not reproduce the visible; rather, it makes visible" [Paul Klee Inward Vision]
"Art is a revolt against fate" [André Malraux Les Voix du silence]
"Art is...pattern informed by sensibility" [Herbert Read The Meaning of Art]
"We must have ... art for art's sake ... the beautiful cannot be the way to what is useful, or to what is good, or to what
is holy; it leads only to itself" [Victor Cousin Sorbonne lecture, 1818]
"Art is meant to disturb. Science reassures" [Georges Braque Pensées sur l'art]
"True art selects and paraphrases, but seldom gives a verbatim translation" [Thomas Bailey Aldrich Ponkapog Papers]
"Art enlarges experience by admitting us to the inner life of others" [Walter Lippmann The Golden Rule and After]

na·ture (n ch r)

n.

1. The material world and its phenomena.

2. The forces and processes that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world: the laws of nature.

3. The world of living things and the outdoors: the beauties of nature.

4. A primitive state of existence, untouched and uninfluenced by civilization or artificiality: couldn't tolerate city life
anymore and went back to nature.

5. Theology Humankind's natural state as distinguished from the state of grace.

6. A kind or sort: confidences of a personal nature.

7. The essential characteristics and qualities of a person or thing: "She was only strong and sweet and in her nature
when she was really deep in trouble" (Gertrude Stein).

8. The fundamental character or disposition of a person; temperament: "Strange natures made a brotherhood of
ill" (Percy Bysshe Shelley).

9. The natural or real aspect of a person, place, or thing. See Synonyms at disposition.

10. The processes and functions of the body.

[Middle English, essential properties of a thing, from Old French, from Latin n t ra, from n tus, past participle of n
sc , to be born; seegen - in Indo-European roots.]
Like a great poet, Nature knows how to produce the greatest effects with the most limited means —Heinrich Heine

1. Nature is like a beautiful woman that may be as delightfully and as truly known at a certain distance as upon a
closer view —George Santayana

Santayana expanded on the simile as follows: “As to knowing her through and through, that is nonsense in
both cases, and might not reward our pains.”

2. Nature is like a revolving door: what goes out in one form comes back in another —Anon
3. Nature like life, she strips men of their pretensions and vanities, exposes the weakness of the weak and the
folly of the fool —W. Macneile Dixon
4. Nature, like lives while they are being lived, is subject to laws of motion; it cannot be stopped and thereby
comprehended —Margaret Sutherland