I first watched this week’s video about beauty, a Ted Talks presentation by Denis Dutton. What is beauty and where did the idea come from? I agree with the first and most widely know definition, “ Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. In my head, somewhat like our discussion on values, it is personal and different for everyone. Some see beauty in things others do not. There was a theory around minute 2:20 that beauty is more precisely in the “culturally conditioned eye of the beholder”. Theorist think that your taste of beauty is developed culturally, by what your culture has determined is beautiful. But later on that theory is disproved and I believe it was wrong. Maybe not way back when, but now, people can find beauty in thousand of things unrelated to their own culture. Dutton explains the painting, picture or landscape that is found universally pleasurable. That is not cultural; people of all cultures find it to be beautiful and find enjoyment by looking at it, or visiting it.
Personally, I am not into art much. Let me revise that and say I’m not into art in the typical sense of the word, paintings or sculptures (that’s what I typically think ‘art’ is). I am into music and dancing to some extent, which can also be art. I think my issue with painting is that I have no interest or experience in painting therefor it is hard for me to appreciate the work. Ellen Dissanayake does a great job of outlining the history of art, its timeline of interpretation and understanding and how to approach art. “’Disinterest’ implied that viewers could appreciate any art, even the artwork of eras or cultures far removed from their own, whether or not they understood the meaning the works had for the people who made and used them” (Dissanayake, 18). Perhaps the reason I don’t find interest in this form of art is because I don’t always see the meanings, reason or purpose or I struggle with aesthetics. I’m a logical minded person and I find difficulty in wrapping my head around it. Apparently I don’t have the ‘disinterested mine’ the author refers to to appreciate fine art. Sure I can appreciate that is someone’s work and they put time and effort into it. But that is not my definition of beauty; I find beauty in other art forms. In the early 20th century, Bell and Fry decided that “ art had become, if not a religion, an ideology whose principles were articulated by and for the few who had leisure and education enough to acquire them” (Dissanayake, 18). Fine art can be seen in museums or galleries, which take time and often money to go see. These leisurely activities are not appealing to all. Education is more of my concern. Fine art is not educated well in my school system and I never sought out any understanding of it, so perhaps that is why it doesn’t appeal to me.
Referenced Text: Dissanayake, E. (1991). What is art for? In K. C. Caroll (Ed.). Keynote adresses 1991 (NAEA Convention), (pp.15-26). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Youtube-Denis Dutton: A Darwinian theory of beauty
I also agree that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Thinking about it like not one person sees exactly the same in art, or any object, as someone else, then I think it is reasonable to discern that beauty is subjective and personal.I don’t know that I particularly agree with the wording “culturally conditioned” that Denis Dutton uses, I think it may be culturally influenced because, I think, ‘conditioned’ implies that the influence of culture can’t be avoided when thinking of the definition of beauty. I do agree with your point that culture is not always a determining factor in deciding what is beautiful, but I think it definitely can be one. Just looking at past sentiments toward what is beautiful we can see that culture can shape that. For example, the differentiation of fashions between countries. The culture most likely would have had an influence on what people found beautiful, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they thought the dress from another country with different cultural ideas of beauty wasn’t beautiful. So, I think that culture does not have to be involved with determining what is beautiful, but that it does have a part in some instances.
-Michelle
I agree that “Beauty is in the eye of the holder”, it is personal and different for everyone. I feel like beauty is something that develops culturally, your culture has determined what you feel is beautiful. There are a lot of similarities of beauty and art in a single culture. It makes up who they are and what they believe in. I also feel that art doesn’t always have to have a meaning, reason, or purpose. Art is something that is beautiful and in many ways makes absolutely no sense at all. I’m curious to know what sort of art forms to you find beauty in? I feel like you are over thinking the understanding and idea of art. Art is supposed to be anything. Like you said beauty is in the eye of the holder. So anything you think is art and beauty is. Education can be seen as something that is beautiful. Learning and being more familiar with the world is one step to becoming more intertwined with art. The hole point I’m making is that your in the drivers seat. Who care what everyone else find think, all that matter is what do you think.