Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Beauty

Ogan
Posts: 407
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2010 6:31:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Do you think that ugly art is not art at all but only the product of diseased mind? And that diseased minds are attracted to ugly art as rats are attracted to underground sewers?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 7:23:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/1/2010 1:03:29 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
It depends on your definition of "beauty". If there's no objective criterion to determine what is beautiful and what is not, one cannot ever rightly say that anything is or isn't beautiful.

http://www.debate.org...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 7:27:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/30/2010 6:31:42 AM, Ogan wrote:
Do you think that ugly art is not art at all but only the product of diseased mind? And that diseased minds are attracted to ugly art as rats are attracted to underground sewers?

That's an interesting idea. I think that some would be attracted to it, but not because they think it's beauty, but because they just like to look at ugliness. Lot's of people now default to ugliness and they wouldn't call it beauty. I think it's more endemic of our culture than anything else.
Ogan
Posts: 407
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 7:52:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
InsertNameHere
"Ugly art" is very, very subjective. What's ugly to one person may be a masterpiece to another.

Ogan: I agree. But the like or dislike of any art may say far more about the type of person than the art itself. But is a masterpiece, say a painting, but a judgement of a ‘respected' few who thereby establish it well and truly on the investment market? I wonder if these same individuals are ‘moved' as much as they say when viewing it in private?

Cody_Franklin
It depends on your definition of "beauty". If there's no objective criterion to determine what is beautiful and what is not, one cannot ever rightly say that anything is or isn't beautiful.

Ogan: Yes, it does indeed depend on how beauty is defined, but I would say that, to me, it is easily defined scientifically, as in geometrical forms based upon the Laws of Harmonic measure, as in music – these are not man-made as such, but are indelibly imprinted in Nature itself.
When we ignore these Laws of measure, symmetry and balance, the immediate result is disharmony and friction. The beautiful working parts of an engine must conform to these Laws or not work. It is the same with health, where there is dis-ease or disharmonic proceedings in the body, it will not work correctly leading to pain and sometimes death.
In music, when a low note is pressed along with the loud pedal, one may hear the overtones clearly resonating, these are the Natural overtones or Harmonics set at the correct mathematical ratios as frequency.
A long time ago my friends and I would play a game. We had to define instantly any word thrown at us. One genius among us upon being given the word ‘music' immediately responded with: "Music defines the mathematical patterns of the emotions, and by an act of sympathy draws the corresponding mood from us." We were all stunned, then burst out laughing!
Light creates a sevenfold rainbow, whilst sound creates a sevenfold scale. Every snowflake that ever fell being hexagon in form is really sevenfold - when we count its Centre, which is far more important than the points proceeding from it.
I suggest that beauty is in the vibratory motions in nature, whether it be light, sound, electrical currents or magnetic fields. Human art to be beautiful should at least correspond with these Laws. But if there are individuals who are in a state of un-ease, which in truth is the cause of all dis-ease, then they will respond the arts that reflect that experience – they would need a certain amount of ugliness or disharmony before they could identify with it, enjoy it and want to buy it.
My comments are only regarding the art itself, not the persons making different the judgements.

innomen
That's an interesting idea. I think that some would be attracted to it, but not because they think it's beauty, but because they just like to look at ugliness. Lot's of people now default to ugliness and they wouldn't call it beauty. I think it's more endemic of our culture than anything else.

Ogan: Perhaps they don't see or hear it as ugly, but what ‘they' deem beautiful. Yes, unfortunately it is endemic, not only of our culture but also the present un-evolved state of some among us. From us they must learn to gradually attune with beauty; from them we must learn patience, understanding and Harmony.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 8:02:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/1/2010 7:52:40 AM, Ogan wrote:

innomen
That's an interesting idea. I think that some would be attracted to it, but not because they think it's beauty, but because they just like to look at ugliness. Lot's of people now default to ugliness and they wouldn't call it beauty. I think it's more endemic of our culture than anything else.

Ogan: Perhaps they don't see or hear it as ugly, but what ‘they' deem beautiful. Yes, unfortunately it is endemic, not only of our culture but also the present un-evolved state of some among us. From us they must learn to gradually attune with beauty; from them we must learn patience, understanding and Harmony.

I won't hold my breath, if anything the trend is going the other way. I don't think that those who enjoy what i consider ugly, beautiful; i just think it's a value that has lost its importance. There is a raw emotionalism that seems to have greater value than beauty. There is an attraction to the primal, whereas my belief in beauty is the rising above the primal.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 10:15:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/30/2010 6:31:42 AM, Ogan wrote:
Do you think that ugly art is not art at all but only the product of diseased mind? And that diseased minds are attracted to ugly art as rats are attracted to underground sewers?

Your question does not even make sense.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Ogan
Posts: 407
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 2:06:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/1/2010 10:15:52 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/30/2010 6:31:42 AM, Ogan wrote:
Do you think that ugly art is not art at all but only the product of diseased mind? And that diseased minds are attracted to ugly art as rats are attracted to underground sewers?

Your question does not even make sense.

I know... that's why we have ugly art.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2010 5:53:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/1/2010 12:35:59 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
"Ugly art" is very, very subjective. What's ugly to one person may be a masterpiece to another.

My stick figures are a masterpiece to someone, my mom.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2011 12:22:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Personally, I find that if you put enough ugly in one spot, it tends to have a strange beauty to it.

Some of the ugliest things in the world are beautiful. Like your mom.

And Captain Beefheart(R.I.P.)
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
andrea01
Posts: 30
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2011 4:53:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/1/2010 12:35:59 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
"Ugly art" is very, very subjective. What's ugly to one person may be a masterpiece to another.

absolutely right buddy.. though its ugly but still its art..
Yarely
Posts: 329
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 9:00:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/9/2011 12:22:55 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Personally, I find that if you put enough ugly in one spot, it tends to have a strange beauty to it.

Some of the ugliest things in the world are beautiful. Like your mom.

And Captain Beefheart(R.I.P.)



And Tom Waits! His music is so skewered and rough that it's sort of really romantic in a way
"Anarchism stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion and liberation of the human body from the coercion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. It stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals""
-Emma Goldman
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 3:44:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/30/2010 6:31:42 AM, Ogan wrote:
Do you think that ugly art is not art at all but only the product of diseased mind? And that diseased minds are attracted to ugly art as rats are attracted to underground sewers?

yes
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
wierdman
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2011 7:21:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/21/2011 2:48:16 PM, sealevel wrote:
for me, there's no such thing as ugly art. everyone has it's own way on creating and interpreting art.

Can art really be ugly?