While he never specifically states that ugliness has any redeeming
value, his critique of the current state of man provides an example of
potentially redeeming qualities in inherent in ugliness. In contrast to
Verbrecher, in which Schiller actively combats the prejudice against
ugliness, his Asthetische Erziehung constitutes a departure from this
idea. Schiller assigns a specific moral function to beauty. He discusses
how barbaric man focuses on the current tastes. The concept of beauty
has more to do with agitation and excitement than any sort of categorical
derivation of beauty. This schism allows for a redeeming dimension of
ugliness. "Schon heiSt ihm in dieser Epoche bloss, was ihn aufregt, was
ihm Stoff gibt—aber aufregt zu einem Widerstand, aber Stoff gibt fur ein
mogliches Bilden, denn sonst wiirde es selbst ihm nicht das Schone sein"
(Schiller 1982). By emphasizing the changing tastes of man, Schiller
notes that the concept of beauty is also constantly changing. He
emphasizes man's fascination with the grotesque, and by presenting an
ugly robber, he appeals to man's barbaric tastes.22
Conclusion
The judgment cast upon Christian is based solely on aesthetic
standards. In the eyes of society, his physical imperfection is thought
indicative of inner corruption. It becomes the impetus for his descent
into crime. The concept of prejudice represents a subjective judgment
and as such cannot represent the true nature of the beings' inner self. As
22 "Er [barbaric man] bildet groteske Gestalten, liebt rache Ubergange, ttppige Formen, grille Kontraste,
scheiende Lichter, einen pathetischen Gesang." (Schiller 1982)
111