[363] I am unable to express in two words the contrast presented by the German tragen and ertragen.
[364] It is not easy to strike the exact interpretation of such a word as Quetschlichkeit. Apparently this or the more usual term Quabbelig have the sense of "shaking." I believe there is a synonym for quaker's grass, viz., quatch-grass.
[365] Und durch sie sich hindurchziehen. The most obvious sense of these words would be: and (i.e., the threads) carry themselves on through it (i.e., externality). Perhaps the meaning is that the relations in question not merely unite the Ideal to the world but are carried beyond (with the Ideal) the natural external world into that higher plane of the objective spiritual world. In my translation I have practically evaded the difficulty and assumed there is either something missing, or we must understand, I admit, a very harsh change of subject.
[366] Through self-consciousness he is both the individual subject and the form of an infinite content.
[367] Eine subjektive Totalität.
[368] I have amplified this sentence to make it quite clear to which of the three worlds, viz., (a) the subjective world in its abstraction, (b) the external world in its abstraction or, finally, the world of reality, in which a and b are mutually related, the writer here refers.
[369] In welche die in sick totale Einheit des Ideals nicht mehr ihrer konkreten Geistigkeit nach hineinzuscheinen befähigt ist. Lit., Into which the self-complete unity of the Ideal is no longer capable of penetrating by virtue of the concrete spirituality which it essentially is.
[370] An obvious distinction between the arts of architecture and garden-construction is that in the former all the materials used have been already informed by human hands at least where building is in any advanced stage.
[371] Hegel's actual words would seem to imply that the fact a garden is created for use and enjoyment is detrimental to its beauty.
[372] It must be admitted that this summary treatment of gardens is not very satisfactory. No doubt the best authorities concur in the view that the formal garden is more artistic than the landscape, but hardly on the main ground given here. Landscape gardening such as we find it in our great English country houses has a real justification of its own. And with regard to the reason given that a garden should be entirely subordinate to the human object do we not strike here upon a weakness which is to a certain extent apparent also in Hegel's theory of the artistic purpose of architecture. I think it must be admitted that though it is true the object of both these arts is not entirely for their own beauty, and in certain cases, not even primarily so, as in the case of a senate-house or ordinary garden, yet where the artistic purpose is manifested throughout with great deliberation they may be essentially an independent work of art; take the case,.of a cathedral, for example, or a really beautiful and homogeneous formal garden.