ALEX BELLY BJELOGRLIC
539
among the members of the given community. Throughout this "incubation"
period certain superficial, censorious rules conceal the ideal. For a long
time, Hamvas says, mankind publicly propagated Utopian ideas and altru–
isms, while an image that does no credit to the human race simmered
in
the depths.
Art, not philosophy or science, is the activity that manages to bridge
the gap between the ideal and reality and attains transcendental powers.
When art is generous, it is able to improve the image of a new life and a
new being, into which man aspires to evolve. And when it is decadent, as
according to Hamvas all modern art is, it will permanently justifY this
secret ideal, however loathsome it may be.
At the dawn of the modern age, in the work of artists such as
Shongauer, Bosch, and Brueghel, the ideal that remained hidden for a long
time finally became apparent: censure yielded and furious monsters entered
the historical scene. Later, Swift presaged them as well, when, in
Jahno,
he
featured a pure two-legged mutant, an evil creature capable only of caus–
ing endless strife.
Modern art, the Hungarian writer suggests, is nothing more than the
vindication of an image man set for himself in secrecy and guarded for cen–
turies. This ideal is "Chirihau," a half insect, half vulture, which creates
incessant strife and lives in unorganized flocks. It is endlessly gluttonous,
given to pranks, brutal, and unsteady. "Chirihau obviously believes that the
only thing that comprises a sane and reasonable life is what he does." "One
has to gorge everything he can and hide from others what he cannot; any
remaining strength is used for copulation and snoring." A serious danger
is posed to humanity
if
the permanent accumulation of these characteris–
tics causes a sudden mutation, which will forever determine the future
direction of life on earth. Naturally, the temporal proportions Hamvas has
in mind are such that the word "instantly" might not indicate a very short
span of time.
However, this theory could be refuted by the fact that contemporary
science has not yet been able to discover the fossilized remains of anything
resembling a transitive form between man and ant, which would confirm
ancient Persian beliefs. From a contemporary scientific point of view, a
well-informed anthropologist would likely dismiss Hamvas's idea as that
of a charlatan, even though anthropology itself represents a realm of end–
less speculation which is modified at certain intervals by new discoveries.
In addition, scientific conclusions are often based upon a few scarce jaws
and piles of teeth, more or less preserved and collected from various sites.
The latest discoveries indicate that we can trace a "common ancestor"
to an even more distant past. When subjected to precise tests, the fossilized
remains of "Australopithecus Marensis" (which some believe to be the
