Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder?

[Remain]

Wow...

*exits stage right*

I am of the belief that anything can be beautiful, to anyone. That includes things I could find horrific. If you find them to be beautiful, then to you, they are beautiful. Who am I to judge and insult your perspective? Likewise, I can't agree with anyone that would deem my more unusual likings, regarding people, things of nature, events, you name it, as "ugly" and expect that to be a universal or established norm or rule I should follow.

And regarding the odd Tarentino/Kill Bill comment...

To some people, war and violence are beautiful. I have the right to disagree with them, but I do not feel entitled to call them a faulty human for their views or see them as being incapable of believing and feeling how they do. Through a certain lens, anything can be beautiful, to someone's mind and someone's eyes. I have the right to disapprove if I find them to be less pleasant, but I will not shake my finger at them and expect them to change the way they see the world on my account, or anyone else's.

I think there's a huge difference between seeing something as beautiful, and perpetuating and encouraging the act itself, a la violence, etc. To many people, particularly filmmakers (and writers, since I am one of them) there is a grotesque or troubling beauty - unpleasant but still very beautiful - element to violence. It has its place. I do not condone the act, but if someone can orchestrate a WWII scene and find a way to see beauty, however abstract, melancholic or strange in it, I will at least give them the time to offer their opinion and show me what they see (even if I completely disagree with it). There is no sin in seeing something as beautiful, and humans are far too complex (turns out the average human likes a whole slew of "horrific" or bad things) to pass too much judgment on our less common views and perspectives.

But then, I should clarify: to me beauty is not always a "happy fun nice" thing, either. It's something that registers and delights the senses, any sense, whether it's our vision, our mind, our imagination... it can be something tragic that inspires me, a la natural disasters, catastrophes we can distance ourselves from, etc... as a writer I have been taught (well, overheard discussions thereof) that there is an awe in power, even if it upsets us when it impacts our lives too closely. And I don't think these pleasures or curiosities- however troubling - should be disregarded as having to be ugly because they cannot "possibly" be beautiful. Who decided that, anyway?

As for the divinity angle: I can't side with you on it, and won't pursue it. Can't say that's of any relevance to me (hence the exit stage right joke).

By the way...

Regarding "inner beauty":

Another really complicated part of a human, but I don't find this to be universal either. Quite frankly, I can hate some really kind and sweet people if they just rub me the wrong way, and I can love and find the small good in an otherwise bad person if there's something I respect about them. I have yet to find any 'universal' kind of "good" (thus, inwardly beautiful I guess?) person that everyone can agree on. I don't know a single person, where everyone can say, "What a great, wonderful human being, I like them."

Yes, most of us like kindness, compassion, etc...

but it's easy to fake many of these qualities, it's easy to present a personality you are not, it's easy to mask qualities that are less favorable, and it's easy for a "bad" person to possess all of these qualities and just not let them show. So I personally would rather assume there is some good in everyone (and truly, I do believe it, call me crazy if you want ), it's just a matter of, When do you find it, is it a set of qualities you appreciate? some will say yes, some will say no. Hey, there's somebody for everybody, for a reason. It can't be universal, or there would be far more single people in the world.

That's why I usually look at external beauty first. Frankly, there's little way to know someone's "internal" qualities until I've approached and gotten to know them very well (and good always comes with some bad to consider, with everyone), so I use the external beauty as a kind of screening process. For me to consider someone beautiful, externally, they must register on my radar. (And I don't mean ONLY sexually. There are platonic features I am drawn towards, psychologically (sort of referencing previous comments made already, earlier in the thread). Psychologically, whether it's a proportional face, narrow eyes, wide eyes, etc, physical features DO carry an impression that registers with people. We can't help this bias, it's a nearly automated process. It's not so easy as saying "I'm going to start finding you attractive today", because the brain does not work that way. You don't get to decide what's inviting, comforting, and pleasing to you. Well, unless you want to condition yourself otherwise, which is... a tad alarming and unnatural, if anything is.

Whew... hope any of that made sense!

[TooBoku]

Ah.... here is where I believe you conflict.

Remove divinity from the picture and remove beauty since the alternative, which is randomness, does not allow it. There is no soul for the beauty to speak to. Merely a series of random chemical reactions that somehow randomly rendered a councious mind out of randomness.

You as a person who works in the arts, are wasting your time trying to acheive the impossible since beauty does not exist for you to achieve it. Or are you? I mean since we are then subjects of randomness, our time spent on doing things isn't ever wasted, it's just spent. Nothing we could do would actually ever matter. We live a meaningless existence.

Beauty must come from divinity.

(is anyone else enjoying this thread?)

[Remain]

Ah.... here is where I believe you conflict.

Remove divinity from the picture and remove beauty since the alternative, which is randomness, does not allow it. There is no soul for the beauty to speak to. Merely a series of random chemical reactions that somehow randomly rendered a councious mind out of randomness.

You as a person who works in the arts, are wasting your time trying to acheive the impossible since beauty does not exist for you to achieve it. Or are you? I mean since we are then subjects of randomness, our time spent on doing things isn't ever wasted, it's just spent. Nothing we could do would actually ever matter. We live a meaningless existence.

Beauty must come from divinity.

(is anyone else enjoying this thread?)

Yep.. completely disagree

The alternative is the biological side of the brain - nerves, impulses, the very signals that make up the knowledge and thoughts in our brain. Without the "soul", beauty speaks to an intellectually-based mind full of signals and messages and years of conclusions, thoughts and instinctive beckoning, no different than it does normally.

My being in the arts, beauty means more than anything to me. I just see it in many different forms, and ways than most people. Granted, there are several artists and writers who subscribe to your idea, that beauty is a fixed ideal and it is agreed upon by some higher level that is not very negotiable or bias to people. That beauty is this divine and incomprehensible force, and so on.

I just don't see it that way It doesn't conflict with my ideas of the "soul", presence or lack thereof. I separate the two concepts quite easily, and live in peace with that.

[Berno]

Holy God damn,,this is pretty complicated

[TooBoku]

The alternative is the biological side of the brain - nerves, impulses, the very signals that make up the knowledge and thoughts in our brain. Without the "soul", beauty speaks to an intellectually-based mind full of signals and messages and years of conclusions, thoughts and instinctive beckoning, no different than it does normally.

My being in the arts, beauty means more than anything to me. I just see it in many different forms, and ways than most people. Granted, there are several artists and writers who subscribe to your idea, that beauty is a fixed ideal and it is agreed upon by some higher level that is not very negotiable or bias to people. That beauty is this divine and incomprehensible force, and so on.

I just don't see it that way It doesn't conflict with my ideas of the "soul", presence or lack thereof. I separate the two concepts quite easily, and live in peace with that.

Hahaha... I love you. This is the most stimulating conversation I've had on BZ.

So you bring up biology. Through eons and eons of evolution the mind, through a series of random events has evolved into a conciousness... but remember that it was completely random. You're just here for the sake of being here, not even that actually. You're just here. Heck, I could say you're not even here since the mass of atomatons in what I presume would be my head, believe you to be a figment of the imagination. You don't rally matter. In fact, I think I'll just sit here and crack mama jokes about you all day.

As for those who may have strange opinions or thoughts on what is beauty. I like what you said about if it is within your right to judge. If we were products of randomness, even though years and years of random thought process have rendered us intelligent beings, we could do what ever the hell we want. However, between us educated people we understand that it isn't and I agree. However, to say someone is wrong when they are wrong is not judging them. Much like telling a person with chicken pox that he is sick isn't judging. Merely stating the truth. In the same manner, people with these skewed perspectives on what beauty is are not there to be judged by normal people. They are merely ill. An illness of the soul. Unfortunately, it is very contageous especially with today's mass media.

As for credentials, I've gone to arts school, I've been principal trombone of 5 award winning marching bands, jazz ensembles, and orchestras, I've been in various parts of the world to play, and I work at one of the most profitable record companies in North America. Beauty also means a lot to me. It means so much to me that I'm willing to sacrifice popularity, status, and often even matrial wealth to seek it. I would set aside my pride for true beauty. When I've created something that is not up to standard, I won't make up an excuse like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" to exhalt my mediocrity as something to be admired.

I know of course, that you will never be convinced since you are locked dead on believing there is no higher authority. It's a shame actually.

[Joe > Average]

By the way...

Regarding "inner beauty":

Another really complicated part of a human, but I don't find this to be universal either. Quite frankly, I can hate some really kind and sweet people if they just rub me the wrong way, and I can love and find the small good in an otherwise bad person if there's something I respect about them. I have yet to find any 'universal' kind of "good" (thus, inwardly beautiful I guess?) person that everyone can agree on. I don't know a single person, where everyone can say, "What a great, wonderful human being, I like them."

Yes, most of us like kindness, compassion, etc...but it's easy to fake many of these qualities, it's easy to present a personality you are not, it's easy to mask qualities that are less favorable, and it's easy for a "bad" person to possess all of these qualities and just not let them show. So I personally would rather assume there is some good in everyone (and truly, I do believe it, call me crazy if you want ), it's just a matter of, When do you find it, is it a set of qualities you appreciate? some will say yes, some will say no. Hey, there's somebody for everybody, for a reason. It can't be universal, or there would be far more single people in the world. That's why I usually look at external beauty first. Frankly, there's little way to know someone's "internal" qualities until I've approached and gotten to know them very well (and good always comes with some bad to consider, with everyone), so I use the external beauty as a kind of screening process. For me to consider someone beautiful, externally, they must register on my radar. (And I don't mean ONLY sexually. There are platonic features I am drawn towards, psychologically (sort of referencing previous comments made already, earlier in the thread). Psychologically, whether it's a proportional face, narrow eyes, wide eyes, etc, physical features DO carry an impression that registers with people. We can't help this bias, it's a nearly automated process. It's not so easy as saying "I'm going to start finding you attractive today", because the brain does not work that way. You don't get to decide what's inviting, comforting, and pleasing to you. Well, unless you want to condition yourself otherwise, which is... a tad alarming and unnatural, if anything is. Whew... hope any of that made sense!

It makes sense, though my focus was more on the qualities themselves moreso than who anyone may or may not think has said qualities. I wasn't implying that anyone who is perceived to be generous will be universally loved, but the appreciation of generosity itself while one is in the state of extreme need and despair for example is universally appreciated in my experience.

[Remain]

I know of course, that you will never be convinced since you are locked dead on believing there is no higher authority. It's a shame actually.

Whoa there... I never even said that. Like I said, I separate beauty from any sense of divine control, influence, et al. It says nothing for my personal religious or spiritual standpoint.

Additionally, comments like these:

In the same manner, people with these skewed perspectives on what beauty is are not there to be judged by normal people. They are merely ill. An illness of the soul. Unfortunately, it is very contageous especially with today's mass media.

..are very upsetting to me, so I'm afraid I can't continue this conversation.

I'm glad you found the line of thought stimulating But to debate this... is not for me

[TheBaronOfFratton]

Who knows WHAT may govern us?

Teachers keep teaching... Preachers keep preaching...

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder baby, and I want you to know that all I see is you..."

[TooBoku]

^^ Please don't misinterpret Setvie Wonder...

I know of course, that you will never be convinced since you are locked dead on believing there is no higher authority. It's a shame actually.

Whoa there... I never even said that. Like I said, I separate beauty from any sense of divine control, influence, et al. It says nothing for my personal religious or spiritual standpoint.

Yet, at the flick of a switch the two are separated which ultimately leads to divinity not actually being divine. The position to say that the divine is not beautiful has been created. Therefore the divine can no longer be divine since one can say something else is more beautiful than the divine. To be divine, you must be the most beautiful, good, wholesome thing within the space-time fabric and outside of this domain as well.

Additionally, comments like these:

In the same manner, people with these skewed perspectives on what beauty is are not there to be judged by normal people. They are merely ill. An illness of the soul. Unfortunately, it is very contageous especially with today's mass media.

..are very upsetting to me, so I'm afraid I can't continue this conversation.

I'm glad you found the line of thought stimulating But to debate this... is not for me

It's a tough cookie to chew. I mean, I get upset when they say Hitler's head was messed up.

[azgirl]

I am a lover of arts.. one of these loves being poetry, this said I had known some great for this subject and me at moments being a die hard hopeless romantic chose to post.. It is amazing the perception each who read will understand this to mean. Note: debated once.. the perception of this poem can mean two seperate thoughts based on a view of outer beauty with thoughts of it to only meaning physical and inner beauty with thoughts of it to be symbolistic only, what do you think?

Sylvia Chidi

Beauty is warm and cold

Beauty is black and bold

Beauty is different for us all I am told

Beauty I would love a chance to mould

Beauty gives the finest pleasure I am told

Beauty can be bought and sold

To the one and only highest bidder

While it graciously glitters like gold

I adore beauty

Oh! How I adore beauty with a passion

I adore beauty with every last breath

Beauty itself is not exempt

From the laws of birth and death

It experiences the joys of being young and old

Blossoming each day in early youth

Maturing adoringly each day with age

Behold, I adore beauty

Oh! How I adore beauty with a passion

Beauty is something I would like to hold

Where there is too much ugly

I can bring it out of a drawer and unfold

Spread it around the entire household

Without worrying about getting a scold

Behold, I adore beauty

Oh! How I adore beauty

When out on a nightie

Quite hungry and thirsty

And you drink the last drops of milk

From a beautiful chest that is busty

I would say, that itself is a faculty of beauty

[TooBoku]

^^ I like it.

[TooBoku]

Someone, please tell me how this is beautiful...

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=13191238498

[azgirl]

Someone, please tell me how this is beautiful...

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=13191238498

[M---]

Urgh that's sick :| :| :| :| :|

:yuckky:

[Berno]

Dirty B*STARDS!!

Who would consider that art??

And inviting him to do it again?..thats just f*cked up...

[TooBoku]

So... if anyone can justify how it is beautiful, I would really like to hear it. I just want to know what goes on in these people's heads.

The dog itself, I would suppose is beautiful. The way it communicates it's hunger, pain, and so on I would suppose beautiful. The bone structure, how this dog is put together, I suppose is beautiful. What is ugly is the cruelty involved. The act of intentionally leaving a creature that supposedly is Man's best friend, to starve to death and suffer while incompassionate eyes just stand there and make a spectacle of it. What is ugly is that all of this is being done for the intent of having no greater purpose. L'arte pour l'arte. This poor dog is left to suffer just for the sake of letting the dog suffer.

This is the reason why I cannot say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It allows cowardly acts of cruelty like this to become beautiful.

[azgirl]

So... if anyone can justify how it is beautiful, I would really like to hear it. I just want to know what goes on in these people's heads.

The dog itself, I would suppose is beautiful. The way it communicates it's hunger, pain, and so on I would suppose beautiful. The bone structure, how this dog is put together, I suppose is beautiful. What is ugly is the cruelty involved. The act of intentionally leaving a creature that supposedly is Man's best friend, to starve to death and suffer while incompassionate eyes just stand there and make a spectacle of it. What is ugly is that all of this is being done for the intent of having no greater purpose. L'arte pour l'arte. This poor dog is left to suffer just for the sake of letting the dog suffer.

This is the reason why I cannot say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It allows cowardly acts of cruelty like this to become beautiful.

Let me point something out about the eye of the beholder...

The eyes of the people who see this as art looks at the art and the mind of those mentally horrible people beholds those eyes thinks it as beautiful art. The eyes are the gateway to the mind.. there fore the eye of the beholder is what first sees the beauty, then the mind makes that choice. That's one way I see it. This can be a really complicated thread.. philosophy and psychology usually is.

I would have more to say but not at this moment.

[fery]

I'd figured I could just jump into this conversation and topic. Imagine my surprise.

[TooBoku]

Exactally. There is no absolute and therefore EVERYTHING becomes subjective, including the truth. I mean, you can say that someone has the right to decide in his mind whether or not something is black but that decision isn't going to change the fact that it is black. Green is green, blue is blue you can't change that. What happens if the person decides white is actually black? You have two conflicting truths, which doesn't make sense since the truth cannot be challenged.... right? Wrong. You see it all over the place today in the judicial system. The truth is always being challenged by some intricate lie some lawyer has weaved together to convince the jury that a guilty man is actually innocent. Is this justice? Many of us know deep inside that it isn't but this is how the system has been working since Darwin's book came out. However, this is indeed justice when beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

The judicial system today, amongst other things is a corrupt mess because the standard of good, evil, and accountability to the Deity has been removed.

The same could be said of this man's so called art. For me to say that this man has the right to do this is a compromise on morals established by the Deity.

[M---]

Exactally. There is no absolute and therefore EVERYTHING becomes subjective, including the truth. I mean, you can say that someone has the right to decide in his mind whether or not something is black but that decision isn't going to change the fact that it is black. Green is green, blue is blue you can't change that. What happens if the person decides white is actually black? You have two conflicting truths, which doesn't make sense since the truth cannot be challenged.... right? Wrong. You see it all over the place today in the judicial system. The truth is always being challenged by some intricate lie some lawyer has weaved together to convince the jury that a guilty man is actually innocent. Is this justice? Many of us know deep inside that it isn't but this is how the system has been working since Darwin's book came out. However, this is indeed justice when beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

The judicial system today, amongst other things is a corrupt mess because the standard of good, evil, and accountability to the Deity has been removed.

The same could be said of this man's so called art. For me to say that this man has the right to do this is a compromise on morals established by the Deity.