<Interesting question asked by friend. I forwarded the same question to my friends and got these responses>
Vinay Ramki (to me): You seem to be loving beauty. I seem to have an opposite opinion I guess. So would love to know more about your perspective.
Beauty, especially physical beauty is one big unfair thing in the world. We have a particular definition of it (most cases it’s being fair color, appropriate size, etc etc) we see that as beauty/sexy(while typing I’m referring to women). It is just how we define, or more appropriately, accept the definition of beauty as. There is an African tribe I guess where pot bellied women are sexy. There’s an other tribe where disfiguring your face in particular ‘cuts’ is beauty.
There are most people who follow this definition and fantasise that beauty. This is extremely unfair on people who mostly don’t fall in that category. Some might not want to fall in that, but nevertheless… Most want to be seen as beautiful, but alas our definition! They don’t fall in that category. It could be for many reasons beyond their control too.
You on the other hand seem to appreciate in a gentle and poetic way, the same beauty. It is beautiful in poetic sense, but isn’t it the the same unfair concept.
So can you give your perspective on this. Many artists also think like you I guess. So knowing why and what you think would help me understand similar (artistic) people.
Indira Krishnamurti Pradhan: In the society we live, our primary scale of value, which is most unfair is in the physical. We are conditioned by factors such as culture, educational background and class and are bombarded daily by the western cultural misogynistic values that emphasize how to remain “young and attractive” for ever. Billions of dollars are generated each year promising the human body a status of “permanent beauty” and also sexuality that are highly valued in western and westernized societies.
Thus our explanation of beauty becomes subjective, when considering beauty and aesthetics. In truth, we all know that the value of an object goes beyond our sensory judgment of what we consider as “beautiful”. It would have to embrace judgment based on emotional and intellectual values of what we are reacting to when we view an object or person by way of beauty.
I would go along with what Aristotle said, which is that it is the experience of the audience that actually determines whether something is art or not. So he does not place importance on the creator’s intention as much as on how the audience reacts to the artwork. It is an absolutely personal decision and conclusion we arrive at when we judge a piece of art.
As far as poetry is concerned, I’d like to quote what Shelley had said: “A poem is the very image of life expressed in its eternal truths.” It is these truths that we are in search of and get sidetracked by externals, which are but a superficial reflection of what lies inside and which we struggle to find. Kant also said: “Whereas the beautiful is limited, the sublime is limitless, so that the mind in the presence of the sublime, attempting to imagine what it cannot, has pain in the failure but pleasure in contemplating the immensity of the attempt.”
Even the rich and famous Hollywood folks whose survival depends on the value placed on their “beauty and wealth” go through a feeling of emptiness and depression beyond a certain point. There is no way they can find permanent joy in the kind of beauty they are programmed to worship in themselves and others. Just as we see beauty in nature or in its natural form externally, we are also infused with its presence internally. This ensures that we live our inner lives too. Beauty is not stagnant; we are in a sense nomadic and travel from threshold to threshold where we discover new possibilities and avenues of creativity and beauty.
In a true sense, we are constantly searching for a state of wholeness, which is a place where we feel that everything is integrated. And until we find that wholeness and attempt to integrate ourselves with our spiritual aspects, ‘beauty’ can only remains “skin deep” in our eyes.
Terry Dalfrano: Beauty counts not for what it is, but for what it suggests: a dream of perfection. A beautiful woman, picture, poem, song are a sort of utopia of a better world. Formal perfection is the negation of the real world. It might sound unjust for the ugly women and bad poets. But it is precisely because we do not like the real world that we like beautiful things. And when we really come to know the object of our admiration, with all its imperfection, we are disillusioned. This is why love cannot be eternal: the real people, and their artistic products, are not eternal, are not perfect.
Please note: Everyone is invited to express their opinion on the question asked by my friend.