Beauty is an abstract concept (as is redness). We cannot isolate the beauty of an object in the same way as we can isolate redness. It is easy to point to something beautiful, but almost impossible to say what its beauty consists of. Leads to the suspicion of beauty. Beauty= Prettiness.
People could say it’s pretty, delicate, but they aren’t deep meanings. Beauty= Superficial.
Damien Hirst, Beautiful, Leeds United 3-0 If It’s Gotta Hole In It Painting (the Vortex of Youth (1999)
Created ‘beautiful’ work by squirting paint on a spinning disk to create art work.
Jeff Koons, Large Vase of Flowers
I think this is a clever piece of artwork because as a culture this is what we think is beautiful, but it is a representation of flowers.
Beauty is meaningless, secondary manner
Ai Wei Wei, Straight, 2003- 12
Straightening of reinforcing rods becomes a memorial to the children who were killed in the earthquake. It seduces you into the work, the beauty is being interested in the work and seduces you to want to know more about it.
The Kill, Andre Masson, 1944
Beauty= Cover for Political manipulation
Igor Babailor, George W. Bush, 2002
Backdrop looks amazing, made to believe he’s a better president than he actually is, traditional, the painting lies.
- Cover for political manipulation
Beauty= alibi for hidden meaning
Is Beauty Objective or Subjective?
Beauty belongs to the object, not my perception of it.
If beauty is objective, then I ought to be able to isolate the beautiful element= the way it curves.
Subjective= the nature of the object is irrelevant.
Is it possible to identify an objective standard of beauty?
Mathematician- Marquardt mask
Tried to create a mask to decide if someone is beautiful, uses the golden ratio
In this test, the Marquardt decided a white female and a white male was the most beautiful. Is it a coincidence that no other race was chosen to be most beautiful, racist?
The Marquardt mask and the composite photo tell us more about cultural prejudices and stereotypes than they do about facial beauty.
Could there be an objective standard for the beauty of dog ‘turds’?
We notice beautiful people, why can’t it be the same for dog faeces?
Immanuel Kant 1724- 1804
Critique of judgement. Beauty is a form of liking. Are all forms of liking the same?
According to Kant, if 2 people disagree about whether something is beautiful or not, it means that 1, or both of them is not being truly disinterested.
Is it possible to look at this poster disinterestedly? We should be impelled to not like it, the context shouldn’t matter in a poster like this.
Kant’s claims are that if we call something beautiful, we expect others to agree with us even if we know in practice that this often does not happen. He is thinking about ideal conditions rather than day-to-day realities.