I don't either. I think it's really clever, and just plain old beautiful. Even with the bizarre a-grammar.

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.

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!

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?

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.

A well-written book can be beautiful — T Clark

So it is the quality of the writing and its form which gives the property beauty.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yes, then I guess we are talking about the same thing. — T Clark

I think so, yes.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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

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.

A beautiful sunset is meaningful. — Jackson

How so?

How so? — Noble Dust

I thought I was responding to your comment that meaning and beauty are the same.

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.

I'm in the process of answering you by asking a question.

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.

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.

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.)

Though, again, I don't consider it a depiction of beauty, I find it aesthetic. — javra

Will you explain each term, beauty and aesthetic?

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.

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.

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?

This, right? — Jackson

Yes.

Not bad — Jackson

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 ...