Art, Beauty, and Monotheism

Cypress said:
Yes, it does. I don't think there is one single flavor of beauty, like in a Norman Rockwell painting, or a dozen roses.

I think there are quaint beauties, savage beauties, stark beauties, natural beauties, strange beauties, etc. Beauty has a certain intangible quality to it.
Click to expand...

Because beauty is a pretty meaningless concept.
 
BidenPresident said:
I have no idea what you said.
Click to expand...

He said you're a miserable human being and you have no beauty in your life that's why you say stupid shit like, "... beauty is a pretty meaningless concept". You have to believe that so you dont have to deal with the fact your life lacks beauty and likely anything else worth having.
 
Last edited:
BidenPresident said:
Because beauty is a pretty meaningless concept.
Click to expand...
Take a trip to Banff national park, the island Kauai, or a boat trip to the Norwegian fjords and you will get an instinctual feeling of the ultimate truth of beauty which will even resonate in your DNA.
 
BidenPresident said:
You don't seem like the type who likes any art.
Click to expand...

You would, of course, be wrong. I have spent hours in major art museums all over the world. the Louvre, The Prado, Kaisma, Palais Du Tokyo, The Met, The Guggenheim, The Getty, etc. I am a ravenous fan of 15th century Flemish art and I LOVE surrealism and low-brow. My favorite artists are Bosch, Schorr, Ryden, Brueghel (the elder), Gerard David, and many others.

In my own "art" I have worked as a graphic designer between my BS and MS degrees as well as an art director for a university newspaper in undergrad.

So, you'd be wrong. In the extreme.
 
Cypress said:
That's because good art, like good literature, good science, and good philosophy, take work. You can't just appreciate it in a vacuum.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. I think that art can and often DOES stand solely on its own. That's the value of great art. It can communicate a feeling (good or bad) without anyone requiring a text write up to explain all the pieces parts.

I also think it's kind of cool to have a piece of art whose "meaning" can suddenly change if you know the background. That's actually about the ONLY part of Guernica that I like. The fact that it is in response to a horror of war. But without that it falls flat for me. (I am one who doesn't really like Picasso anyway, so that's why)

Those who are going to appreciate Geurnica are those who have done the work of studying history, listening to art historians, and reading the printed museum summaries that come with the painted collections.
Click to expand...

It also helps if they like Picasso' schtick.


But I kind of disagree overall. For instance, Gerard David's "Judgement of Cambyses" can be appreciated as a harrowing piece of art technically pulled off quite well even without knowing the underlying story or the allegorical nature of the painting.
 
Cypress said:
Agreed. You have to work to develop the mental faculties and sensibilities to appreciate anything like Geurnica. A four year old kid is getting nothing out of Guernica or the Pieta.
Click to expand...

Do you like any art that isn't already generally known to be a "classic"? In other words: how do you come to new art in your life?
 
BidenPresident said:
I am an artist.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with my opinion that objective beauty really does exist out there.
50 years of watching extraordinary sunsets, snow clad mountains, and crystal clear starry night skies with hundreds of people is more than sufficient evidence to me that an objective beauty is out there and intelligible to humans.
 
Cypress said:
That has nothing to do with my opinion that objective beauty really does exist out there.
50 years of watching extraordinary sunsets, snow clad mountains, and crystal clear starry night skies with hundreds of people is more than sufficient evidence to me that an objective beauty is out there and intelligible to humans.
Click to expand...

So you find somethings beautiful and you infer that there is objective beauty. Pretty solid reasoning.
 
Cypress said:
That has nothing to do with my opinion that objective beauty really does exist out there.
50 years of watching extraordinary sunsets, snow clad mountains, and crystal clear starry night skies with hundreds of people is more than sufficient evidence to me that an objective beauty is out there and intelligible to humans.
Click to expand...

I never said beauty is subjective or objective. Seems like a trivial distinction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top