The Modern Revival Of Classical Aesthetics

From the perspective of modernity, classical aesthetics was a modality of aesthetics in contrast to modern aesthetics, which was a kind of covered and forgotten modality of aesthetics after the rise of modern aesthetics. The standard that classical aesthetics was different from modern aesthetics, was not the standard that the ancient age differed from the modern age in the sense of history. It was decided by the relationship between beauty and being. Classical aesthetics was a kind of aesthetics which was grounded on the basis of being-ontology, namely a kind of aesthetics that studied the beauty of being. In the classical aesthetics, beauty was defined neither from the aesthetic senses or psychology, nor from the pure forms of aesthetic objects, but from being itself. In the classical aesthetics, the beauty united with the truth and the good. Because beauty was defined from being itself, it owned a sort of holiness and sublimity that the secular aesthetics in the modern age lacked. By contrast with modern aesthetics, classical aesthetics could be called the true aesthetics, a sort of real philosophy: modern aesthetics was only a "science" that was dominated by "aesthetic learning", a kind of aesthetics in the severely narrow sense.Classical aesthetics was a dominated modality of ancient aesthetics. In the west, from ancient Greece to ancient Rome, classical aesthetics of philosophy dominated the mainstream of aesthetics. In the Christian era, classical aesthetics emerged into the horizon of theology, and finally became classical aesthetics of theology in the middle age. From the late medieval age, classical aesthetics (of theology) gradually declined. The Reformation of Martin Luther sped up the procession of decline. However, the final decline was directly caused by the arrogation that aesthetic epistemology took away the basic position of aesthetic ontology in the 18^th century. Fundamentally speaking, it was caused by the subjectivity transformation of Enlightenment philosophy. For the subjectivity transformation of aesthetics, the positive facet was the independence and modern transformation of aesthetics which caused the prosperity of modern aesthetics that was dominated by aesthetic learning; the negative facet was that caused the alienation among beauty and truth and good and being itself, the narrowness of the idea of beauty, which finally caused the modern crisis of aesthetics which beauty faded out from the perspective of the human ultimate value, and aesthetics itself became more and more fringe.In front of the modern crisis of aesthetics, modern aesthetics had absolutely lacked such a kind of sources to resolve the crisis, so the renewal of classical aesthetics became the urgent affairs. The modern renaissance of classical aesthetics began with the renewal of Christian theological aesthetics in the 20^th century. Hans Urs von Balthasar was the first thinker that recognised the tradition of classical aesthetics. His voluminous system of theological aesthetics, which was worthy of the milestone of the modern renewal of Christian theological aesthetics, was a model for the modern renaissance of classical aesthetics. In the future, the complete and systematic renewal of classical aesthetics could not be separated from the relative coordinates.With the length of six volumes, Balthasar systematically cleared up the sources of theological aesthetics in the three fields, the tradition of theology in the west, the tradition of philosophy in the west, and Bible. Factually, this was the systematical excavation and liquidation of the tradition of classical aesthetics in the west under the perspective of theological aesthetics. This established not only the solid basis for his theological aesthetics as the modern renewal of a kind of classical aesthetics, but also the basis of frame for the objectively systematical liquidation of classical aesthetics in the future. On the basis of (holy) ontology and the doctrine of the transcendental, Baltalsar founded the theological metaphysics of beauty, which not only established the ontological basis for his theory system of theological aesthetics, but also offered a model for the reconstruction of ontology of classical aesthetics. Depending on the theological principle of analogy, Balthasar founded the doctrine of dualist structure of holy beauty and secular beauty. In his theological aesthetics, the dualist structure of aesthetics was presented by the opposition and union between glory and beauty. This structure presented obviously in Jesus Christ. Balthasar's theological aesthetics paid equal attention to the objective research and the subjective research on beauty, and held the view of aesthetics that the objective was united with the subjective. In the aspect of objective research, he thought beauty was form and splendor. The two elements of aesthetics finally united in the form of Christ and radiated the splendor of holy beauty (glory), so his theological aesthetics centered on Christology, and formed a kind of aesthetic Christology. In the aspect of subjective research, he thought aesthetic learning was an inseparable part of theological aesthetics, and regarded seeing and believing as its most important elements. Balthasar's theological aesthetics first presented as a kind of aesthetics of love which centered on Christology, and through aesthetics of love spread on the topics of revelation and redemption, finally pointed to a sort of aesthetics of salvation and life. These were the core sources of thought which Balthasar's theological aesthetics offered as a kind of modern theory of classical aesthetics.In one word, Balthasar's theological aesthetics had three main historical significances for the modern renaissance of classical aesthetics: a) his systematical liquidation of the tradition of classical aesthetics in the west under the perspective of theological aesthetics, established the basis of frame for the modern liquidation of classical aesthetics in the west; b) Balthasar's theological aesthetics itself fulfilled the modern renewal of classical aesthetics in the tradition of theology, and built up a model of theory for the modern renewal of classical aesthetics; c) as a kind of modern theory of classical aesthetics that had some universal characters of classical aesthetics, Balthasar's theological aesthetics offered sources of theory and relative coordinates for the systematic construction of universally classical aesthetics.