From the book
The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volumes I–II
Joseph Joubert · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordSculpture and statue serve as specific artistic categories whose beauty can differ from beauty of expression or of a work considered more broadly.
- In JoubertThe Apollo Belvedere judgment calls it unsurpassed as a statue while allowing other statues more beautiful expression.
- In this editionThe English translation retains the alternative restatement and does not supply an answer to “Why sculpture is not very Christian.” “Was bound to” expresses inferred inevitability in the Raphael remark, not an imposed obligation.
- A place to beginBeauty as a statue differs from beauty of expression and of the broader work.
- English renderings
- sculpture; statue
Meaning
Sculpture and statue serve as specific artistic categories whose beauty can differ from beauty of expression or of a work considered more broadly.
Use in the book
The Apollo Belvedere judgment calls it unsurpassed as a statue while allowing other statues more beautiful expression. Joubert then restates the distinction as most beautiful statue but not most beautiful work. The shifting comparison matters: an art’s category does not settle every kind of excellence. The note contrasting Christian painting and sculpture likewise leaves an explanatory question open, with inward worship explicitly said not to be the only reason. Sculpture is finally included among arts whose beauty comes from soul or entrails, so its formal medium does not exclude an inward source.
Places to read
- I, p. 465, entry 5, ¶1Beauty as a statue differs from beauty of expression and of the broader work.
- II, p. 640, entry 4, ¶1Painting and sculpture receive a tentative religious comparison.
- II, p. 814, entry 5, ¶1Sculpture joins other arts in the soul/entrails claim.
Translation in this edition
The English translation retains the alternative restatement and does not supply an answer to “Why sculpture is not very Christian.” “Was bound to” expresses inferred inevitability in the Raphael remark, not an imposed obligation.
Source note
Beaunier 1938, I, pp. 465; II, pp. 640, 814.