• Deleted User
    0


    I don't either. I think it's really clever, and just plain old beautiful. Even with the bizarre a-grammar.
  • T Clark
    14k
    At any rate, though what is beautiful is always aesthetic, what is aesthetic is not always beautiful.javra

    I intend this as a serious comment. I don't think it's just a quibble.

    Every definition of "aesthetic" I can find defines the word in relation to beauty, so if it's aesthetic, it's beautiful. I think that means we have to expand the definition of "beauty" beyond just what is pleasant to experience.
  • Deleted User
    0




    I think, no matter who started the thread, the troll is the poster being the biggest dick. Haha.

    Of course, it's hard not to be a fairly sizable dick at times in an anonymous exchange. It's a challenge for even the sweetest of us: Me, of course. :hearts: :heart: :hearts: :heart:

    Especially when the mods let it happen again and again. Not complaining, mods! It's good fun!
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    I that means we have to expand the definition of "beauty" beyond just what is pleasant to experience.T Clark

    How would you define beauty?
  • T Clark
    14k
    How would you define beauty?Jackson

    Most of my experience with art is through literature and poetry. A well-written book can be beautiful even if it is hard to read. One that comes to mind is "Painted Bird" by Jerzy Kosinski. Such a struggle to finish. So bleak.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    A well-written book can be beautifulT Clark

    So it is the quality of the writing and its form which gives the property beauty.
  • T Clark
    14k
    So it is the quality of the writing and its form which gives the property beauty.Jackson

    The experience is beautiful, but unpleasant. It's not something I enjoy. I try to avoid that kind of art.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    The experience is beautiful, but unpleasant. It's not something I enjoy. I try to avoid that kind of art.T Clark

    Similar to Aristotle's idea of catharsis.
  • T Clark
    14k
    Similar to Aristotle's idea of catharsis.Jackson

    When I think of "catharsis" I think of purging unpleasant emotions. I don't think that's what I'm talking about. I think there can be value, truth, beauty in an unpleasant experience. As I said, it's not something I want to do. Perhaps it's a sign of weakness; yes, it is; but I like happy endings.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    When I think of "catharsis" I think of purging unpleasant emotions.T Clark

    Yes. I meant that Aristotle is talking about unpleasant emotions and how they still are part of art.
  • T Clark
    14k
    Yes. I meant that Aristotle is talking about unpleasant emotions and how they still are part of art.Jackson

    Yes, then I guess we are talking about the same thing.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    Yes, then I guess we are talking about the same thing.T Clark

    I think so, yes.
  • javra
    2.6k
    At any rate, though what is beautiful is always aesthetic, what is aesthetic is not always beautiful. — javra

    I intend this as a serious comment. I don't think it's just a quibble.

    Every definition of "aesthetic" I can find defines the word in relation to beauty, so if it's aesthetic, it's beautiful. I think that means we have to expand the definition of "beauty" beyond just what is pleasant to experience.
    T Clark

    I noticed that about the definitions. But, then, definitions can be imperfect, and the cultural significance of terms is malleable.

    More to the point, in my neck of the woods, to call a heterosexual, good looking guy beautiful is most always to insult the guy, this by deeming him feminine - despite the guy having an aesthetically pleasing appearance, i.e. being handsome. (Be this semantic something that ought to be or not, it in practice is.) Which to me is one indication that the English term "beauty" is lopsided toward describing that which is of feminine attributes.

    Then again, what of the ugly in art which is nevertheless attractive, captivating, and pleasing? Isn't it a contradiction in semantics to affirm that a painting is both beautiful and ugly?

    One that comes to mind is "Painted Bird" by Jerzy Kosinski.T Clark

    Great book by the way.
  • T Clark
    14k
    Then again, what of the ugly in art which is nevertheless attractive, captivating, and pleasing? Isn't it a contradiction in semantics to affirm that a painting is both beautiful and ugly?javra

    As I said, art is about experience. It's not necessarily the picture that's beautiful, it's the experience.

    Great book by the way.javra

    Hated it, but yes, very well written. Compelling. Unforgettable.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    Then again, what of the ugly in art which is nevertheless attractive, captivating, and pleasing? Isn't it a contradiction in semantics to affirm that a painting is both beautiful and ugly?javra

    I have never seen an ugly painting. I barely even understand the concept.
  • javra
    2.6k
    It's not necessarily the picture that's beautiful, it's the experience.T Clark

    OK, but isn't the artwork nevertheless aesthetic to the beholder(s) even if not beautiful?

    BTW, : I'll try my best to laconically define the aesthetic: that which draws one in, this conceptually and emotively, into a realm of truths/realities that intrigue but are not yet fully understood.

    To me, this can be applied to biological beauty (what differentiates plain ol' sexual attraction to big boobs, as an example for some, from the aesthetic attraction toward another's appearance, even if they are over a hundred years old) just as much as to abstract art, or to a mathematical model, or to a particular soul/psyche, so to speak.

    Debatable, I know, but I thought I'd give it a shot. Can't now think of anything I find aesthetic that doesn't. Don't know if its an over-generalization.
  • javra
    2.6k
    I previously mentioned some of Goya's later works. Here's an example (if I can get the image to show):

    File:Viejos_comiendo_sopa.jpg

    (Two Old Men Eating Soup)

    Edit: OK, that didn't work, but here's the link:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Viejos_comiendo_sopa.jpg#/media/File:Viejos_comiendo_sopa.jpg
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    I previously mentioned some of Goya's later works. Here's an example (if I can get the image to show):
    (Two Old Men Eating Soup)
    javra

    Good. I would classify that as a bit grotesque, but not ugly. I mean, the painting is not ugly.
  • Noble Dust
    8k
    A beautiful sunset is meaningful.Jackson

    How so?
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    How so?Noble Dust

    I thought I was responding to your comment that meaning and beauty are the same.
  • javra
    2.6k
    Alright, but it's in the eye of the beholder. To me it's not grotesque - or else viscerally revolting - but simply ugly, in both technique and depiction of subject mater. To each their own, though.
  • Noble Dust
    8k


    I'm in the process of answering you by asking a question.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    Alright, but it's in the eye of the beholder. To me it's not grotesque - or else viscerally revolting - but simply ugly, in both technique and depiction of subject mater. To each their own, though.javra

    I look at a painting in terms of what it tells me. First, I love the colors and the shapes.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    I previously mentioned some of Goya's later works. Here's an example (if I can get the image to show):



    (Two Old Men Eating Soup)
    javra


    Thanks, have not seen that before. The more I look at it the more I like it.
  • javra
    2.6k
    The more I look at it the more I like it.Jackson

    Yea, I like it too. (Though, again, I don't consider it a depiction of beauty, I find it aesthetic.)
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    Though, again, I don't consider it a depiction of beauty, I find it aesthetic.javra

    Will you explain each term, beauty and aesthetic?
  • javra
    2.6k
    Will you explain each term, beauty and aesthetic?Jackson

    The aesthetic I did my best to define in this post. The beautiful, as I previously addressed, to me typically indicates in today's world a subcategory of the aesthetic that addresses its more feminine attributes. Ugliness can thereby be aesthetic, though not beautiful.

    At least this is my current best understanding.

    Though I think @T Clark does have a very good point in that the experiences of the aesthetic can always be deemed beautiful as experiences per se.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    The aesthetic I did my best to define in this post.javra

    This, right?: "that which draws one in, this conceptually and emotively, into a realm of truths/realities that intrigue but are not yet fully understood."

    Not bad; I see what you mean. I would talk more about perception, but not disagreeing.
  • Jackson
    1.8k
    The beautiful, as I previously addressed, to me typically indicates in today's world a subcategory of the aesthetic that addresses its more feminine attributes.javra

    I think I understand this, but have trouble with "feminine attributes." For example, a beautiful sunset. How are its properties feminine?
  • javra
    2.6k
    This, right?Jackson

    Yes.

    Not badJackson

    Cool. Nice to hear.

    I would talk more about perception, but not disagreeing.Jackson

    Yes, but perception is its own minefield, to my mind. Still, if you have opinions you want to share ...
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment