The concept of beauty is a very difficult one to define, due particularly to the fact that it is often equated with desire. We use the adjective “beautiful” to describe something that we like, and presumably want, coveting a concept of the ideal. Throughout history there has been an observable shift in the perspective of beauty. The determination of specific historic definitions can help us understand what the notion and assessment of “traditional” or “true” beauty has been. Despite being framed through different time periods, the concept of beauty remains largely of personal taste. Unfortunately, as we move through history to present day, there has been a transformation of beauty standards to the expectation of a perfect ideal. Beauty is no longer found in parts, but is rather sought as a greater whole. In studying beauty, we must move back to finding a definition of beauty through the ugly, appreciating the differences that define each unique individual, rather than subscribing the emerging supposition of an emerging “traditional” or “standard” beauty.
Beauty is a very relative term used to describe something. Throughout history items deemed “beautiful,” have shifted and changed. As Umberto Eco explains in The History of Beauty, “beauty has never been absolute and immutable but has taken on different aspects depending on the historical period and the country” (Eco, 14). Every individual has a different concept of beauty. It is through perception that beauty can be defined. The consideration of beauty may very well be in the eye of the beholder. There is a certain perspective that dictates the appreciation of aesthetics. Perhaps it is through the consideration of parts as opposed to the whole, or the myth that surrounds an ephemeral beauty (Akbari, 9/15). Different time periods dictate different trends, so why wouldn’t they also dictate what we desire and, in turn, consider beautiful.
In terms of perspective, the definition of beauty, beyond the observation of it, has largely transformed throughout history. In Greek art, for example, beauty was created through the sum of beautiful parts, rather than finding one true and idealized beautiful form as a whole (Eco). Plato found beauty in harmony and proportion. The reflective and symmetric form was the realized image of beauty (Eco). Interestingly, the Apollonian and Dionysiac forms of beauty were dictated by their mutual existence (Eco). Without chaos, the theory teaches, we cannot recognize serenity; without the grotesque, we cannot appreciate beauty. Interestingly, through all these definitions of beauty, we see one common theme that is explored in Richard Scruton’s book, “Beauty”: the beauty we perceive based on an author’s description or an artist’s depiction is an opinion manifested by the author themselves, not possessed by the object. Beauty is relative to its surroundings and the observer. It cannot be universally perceived or beheld.
Moreover, we oftentimes use the description of beauty to justify our tastes. There is an aesthetic goal working to be realized through most forms of media. In acknowledging and appreciating a pleasing aesthetic we, as the observer, prove our awareness of the work that was put into making something beautiful. We further are able to gain status of good or bad taste for identifying the success or failure of achieving beauty in art. This distinctive appreciation can be further celebrated through overtly displaying an appreciation for the other. By noticing beauty in some different culture, ritual, or tradition, we are able to exhibit our worldliness and openmindedness.
Unfortunately, as a society, our appreciation of beauty has transformed itself into an idealized expectation of beauty. Due to an over-saturation of images, our concept of what is exceptional has been watered down to an expectation of the everyday, and the everyday wonders and beauty have been diminished to the categorically mundane (Akbari, 9/22). Our emerging culture of dissatisfaction has led to an under-value of the beauty that can be experienced in everyday life. While there may be an overuse of the term beauty to describe different objects and experiences, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the description of something as “beautiful” should and can only be reserved for exalted moments, but it rather means that we must find beauty in the minute, as well as the major, aspects of life. If beauty is a concept of perception, maybe it is how we perceive our everyday life that should shift, rather than the celebration constantly attributed to fantastic experiences.
With the need to shift our perception, perhaps we have to change what we perceive relatively as “ugly,” “grotesque,” or “imperfect.” Things that are different or foreign do not necessarily need to be characterized as the antithesis of beauty. The pursuit of an exterior aesthetic has misguided our appreciation for things that are not pristine. In an age of technology, our expectation of perfection has become unnecessarily unattainable (Akbari, 9/29). Inherent to our humanity, we are imperfect. There is also an interesting expectation of perfection that shapes our perception of it. For example, in Umberto Eco’s book “On Ugliness,” Eco includes the passage, “They Thought the Following Were Ugly.” We, as present day readers, scoff at the absurdity of considering Claude Monet an untalented painter, or Fred Astaire an ugly and poor dancer. But that is because we know what happened thereafter. We have put both these artists on a pedestal in their creation of beauty that we have come to appreciate in a retrospective light, thus perpetuating our impression of their actual abilities. If we perceive that something or someone can do no wrong and will produce or personify a definition of beauty, they will most likely fulfill that impression. The lenses through which we allow ourselves to look at an object or product transform our perception of its beauty.
In all, while there may be a specific definition of beauty or attractiveness, it is not absolute. The history of beauty has constantly been rewritten and redefined. Trends are constantly changing. The concept of beauty can change drastically as a reaction against itself. Our comparisons and context of beauty is what determines our definition of it. Through learning the history of beauty, along with the differing perspectives, it is clear that there is no one, absolute manifestation of beauty. Beauty can be found in the ugly, and the ugly can help us determine what is beautiful. We must work against unrealistic expectations for ourselves, and rather find the beauty that is possessed by that ugly. As imperfect and ever-changing human beings, our perceptions and opinions can also change. If we, as humans, change shouldn’t the world we perceive and the tastes we dictate similarly shift? Our own uniqueness determines our exceptional ability to discern desires, attractions, and concepts of beauty.
Works Cited:
Akbari, Anna. Beauty, Beauty and the Body in an Image Society. 194 Mercer Street 210, New York University, New York, NY. 15 September 2010.
Akbari, Anna. Beauty, Beauty and the Body in an Image Society. 194 Mercer Street 210, New York University, New York, NY. 22 September 2010.
Akbari, Anna. Ugliness and the Grotesque, Beauty and the Body in an Image Society. 194 Mercer Street 210, New York University, New York, NY. 29 September 2010.
Eco, Umberto. History of Beauty. New York: Rizzoli, 2004.
Eco, Umberto. On Ugliness. New York: Rizzoli, 2004.
Scruton, Richard. Beauty. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
If our concept of beauty is perpetually evolving, then why do we place such emphasis on the "achievement" of beauty? How do we reconcile such irrational futility?
ReplyDelete