John Ruskin (curated) dictionary

Beau­ty: I whol­ly deny that the impres­sions of beau­ty are in any way sen­su­al; they are nei­ther sen­su­al nor intel­lec­tu­al, but moral. (MP, Vol 1, Chap­ter 2).
(… ) It is evi­dent that the sen­sa­tion of beau­ty is not sen­su­al on the one hand, nor is it intel­lec­tu­al on the oth­er; but it is depen­dent on a pure, right, and open state of the heart. (Ibid, 40).
(…) By the term Beau­ty, then, are prop­er­ly sig­ni­fied two things. First, that exter­nal qual­i­ty of bod­ies already so often spo­ken of, and which, whether it occur in a stone, flower, beast, or man, is absolute­ly iden­ti­cal: which, as I have already assert­ed, may be shown to be in some sort typ­i­cal of the Divine attrib­ut­es, and which, there­fore, I shall, for distinction’s sake, call Typ­i­cal Beau­ty. (MP Vol. 1).
(…) man can­not advance in the inven­tion of beau­ty, with­out direct­ly imi­tat­ing nat­ur­al form. (SL, Lamp of Beau­ty).
(…) Must not beau­ty, then, it will be asked be sought for in the forms which we asso­ciate with our every-day life ? (SL, Lamp of Life).
(…) The essen­tial char­ac­ters of Beau­ty depend­ed on the expres­sion of vital ener­gy in organ­ic things… (SL, Lamp of Life).
(…) These sources of beau­ty, how­ev­er, are not pre­sent­ed by any very great work of art in a form of pure tran­script. They invari­ably receive the reflec­tion of the mind under whose influ­ence they have passed, and are mod­i­fied or coloured by its image. This mod­i­fi­ca­tion is the work of Imag­i­na­tion. (MP, Vol. 2, para. 1).

Vital Beau­ty: (…) the appear­ance of felic­i­tous ful­fill­ment of func­tion in liv­ing things, more espe­cial­ly of the joy­ful and right exer­tion of per­fect life in man ; and this kind of beau­ty I shall call Vital Beau­ty. (MP, Vol. 1, para. 16).
(…)  the first state of vital beau­ty is defined to be Hap­pi­ness, per­ceived with sym­pa­thy ; the sec­ond, … Moral inten­tion, per­ceived with praise. Hence the first apho­rism of the Laws of Fes­ole: “All great art is prune.” (MP, Vol. 1, Chap­ter 1).
(…) We think we love it (art) for its beau­ty, but real­ly we love it for its vital­i­ty. (SV, Intro.).

Of truth and beau­ty: (…) that is to say, truth first, and beau­ty after­wards. High art dif­fers from low art in pos­sess­ing an excess of beau­ty in addi­tion to its truth, not in pos­sess­ing an excess of beau­ty incon­sis­tent with truth. (MP, para. 34).Enjoy­ment: (…) I believe the right ques­tion to ask, respect­ing all orna­ment, is sim­ply this: Was it done with enjoyment—was the carv­er hap­py while he was about it? It may be the hard­est work pos­si­ble, and the hard­er because so much plea­sure was tak­en in it; but it must have been hap­py too, or it will not be liv­ing. (MP, Chap­ter 5, para. 24).Nature: Great art accepts Nature as she is, but directs the eyes and thoughts to what is most per­fect in her; false art saves itself the trou­ble of direc­tion by remov­ing or alter­ing what­ev­er it thinks objec­tion­able. (MP, Vol. 2, Chap­ter 3, para.13).
(…) The more a painter accepts nature as he finds it, the more unex­pect­ed beau­ty he dis­cov­ers in what he at first despised (Ibid.)
(…) High art, there­fore, con­sists nei­ther in alter­ing, nor in improv­ing nature (Ibid.)
Nature … keeps what­ev­er she has done best, close sealed, until it is regard­ed with rev­er­ence (Ibid).
(…) He who is clos­est to Nature is best. (Ibid, Chap­ter 10, para. 5).
take plea­sure at last in every aspect of age and des­o­la­tion which eman­ci­pates the objects of nature from the gov­ern­ment of men. (Ibid, Chap­ter 16, para. 5).
(…) Observe: the whole force of edu­ca­tion, until very late­ly, has been direct­ed in every pos­si­ble way to the destruc­tion of the love of nature. (Ibid, Chap­ter 17, para. 31).
(…) Instead of sup­pos­ing the love of nature nec­es­sar­i­ly con­nect­ed with the faith­less­ness of the age, I believe it is con­nect­ed prop­er­ly with the benev­o­lence and lib­er­ty of the age. (Ibid, Chap­ter 17, para. 34).

Ruskin’s aes­thet­ics: (…) For as (1) the choice of the high sub­ject involves all con­di­tions of right moral choicer and as (2) the love of beau­ty involves all con­di­tions of right admi­ra­tion, and as (3) the grasp of truth involves all strength of sense, even­ness of judg­ment, and hon­esty of pur­pose, and as (4) the poet­i­cal pow­er involves all swift­ness of inven­tion, and accu­ra­cy of his­tor­i­cal mem­o­ry, the sum of all these pow­ers is the sum of the human soul. (MP, para. 42).

Rules: (…) The great men … have no rules; can­not com­pre­hend the nature of rules;—do not, usu­al­ly, even know, in what they do, what is best or what is worst: to them it is all the same; some­thing they can­not help say­ing or doing,—one piece of it as good as anoth­er, and none of it (it seems to them) worth much. The moment any man begins to talk about rules, in what­so­ev­er art, you may know him for a sec­ond-rate man; and, if he talks about them much, he is a third-rate, or not an artist at all. To this rule there is no excep­tion in any art. (MP, Vol. 3, para. 84).

Style: (…) The style is greater or less in exact pro­por­tion to the noble­ness of the inter­ests and pas­sions involved in the sub­ject. (MP, Vol. 3, para. 5).

Truth: (…) There is nev­er vul­gar­i­ty in a whole truth, how­ev­er com­mon­place. It may be unim­por­tant or painful. It can­not be vul­gar. Vul­gar­i­ty is only in con­ceal­ment of truth, or in affec­ta­tion. (MP, Vol. 3, para. 83).
(…) Every duty which we omit obscures some truth which we should have known; and the guilt of a life spent in the pur­suit of plea­sure is twofold, part­ly con­sist­ing in the per­ver­sion of action, and part­ly in the dis­sem­i­na­tion of false­hood. (SV, Chap­ter 3, para. 28).
(…) so far as the truth is seen by the imag­i­na­tion in its whole­ness and quiet­ness, the vision is sub­lime. (SV, Idem, para. 62).

Lov­ing enthu­si­asm: (…) this lov­ing enthu­si­asm, which seeks for a beau­ty fit to be the object of eter­nal love; this inven­tive skill, which kind­ly dis­plays what exists around us in the world; and this play­ful ener­gy of thought which delights in var­i­ous con­di­tions of the impos­si­ble (MP, Vol. 3, 71).

Ugly: I would fain be allowed to assume also the con­verse of this, name­ly, that forms which are not tak­en from nat­ur­al objects must be ugly. (SL, Chap­ter 4)

List of works by Ruskin cit­ed here:
SV: The Stones of Venice, in 3 Vol­umes, by Project Guten­berg. Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3.
MP: Mod­ern Painters, in 5 Vol­umes, by Project Guten­berg.  Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3, Vol. 4, Vol. 5.
SL: The Sev­en Lamps of Archi­tec­ture, by Project Guten­berg,