Kevin's Watch

Close has been a little quiet lately, so I thought I'd start a topic for some desultory conversation. As I occasionally mention, pretty much every day I'm struck by how glad I am that I live in Africa. Watching the sun rise as I drive to work, hearing the birdsong, smelling the rain and the wet earth, I marvel over it all, (in between cursing myself for not carrying my camera at all times ).

But over the last couple of days, I've been thinking about the why. Why is it that we find things beautiful? What it it in us that provides that response? And why is our perception so varied? What makes one thing beautiful to somebody, and not to another?

I'm minded always of TC's comment to Mhoram about "scenery." I really don't think that we, or I at least, could live without it.

What do you think? What's beautiful? And why is it beautiful?

What value to a red sunrise? An electrical storm? And yet, our response to it is undeniable. It cannot feed our bodies...so it must be feeding our "soul"...mustn't it?

What makes things beautiful?

--Avatar

Well, I guess the technical reason would be that as those imagages are trasported to the nerve endings in our brians, they also ignight the pleasure sensors.

That or they go directly into our souls.

True beauty provokes a physical response. You can feel beauty. Not being blessed with the vistas you're describing (living here in my drab little city), I can only say that the emotion I get from a good storm or sunrise is one of, "Oh. That's how it's supposed to be." It's like remembering something that you've never actually experienced before.

Beauty reminds us of the primal nature of joy. It's an external expression of what we're supposed to feel internally.

Plissken wrote:Beauty reminds us of the primal nature of joy. It's an external expression of what we're supposed to feel internally.

Aah, I like that Pliss, I like that a lot. A genetic memory of the way things used to be? A reminder of the way that the world used to look? Yeah, I can go for that.

Beauty is one of those things that I can accept as being good, in and of itself. Not necessarily serving some purpose, or slave to some greater or lesser drive or desire.

Of course, certain elements, like attraction, must serve those other drives, but "natural" beauty, for want of a better word, can't. Or at least, I don't see how it could. If anybody has any ideas...

--A

I think that Pliss touches on a very central thing here. Beauty is probably very much related to memory. This would also explain why the concept of beauty is so subjective.

If there is such a thing as objective beauty I would guess that you could trace it back to the fullfillment of some basic desire (a good example being the attraction between the sexes).

Sorry to be a spoilsport

Not spoiling anything. All input valued.

I'd agree with you on the whole, about the attraction thing, but even there, beauty is pretty subjective. Some people like one look, others a different one. Never seen anything that everybody would agree is beautiful.

But let's think about this memory thing. I'm not sure exactly what approach you're taking: My interpretation of Pliss' comment as relating to some primal, cellular memory of the past?

Or instead, the association of what we think of as being beautiful with some pleasant memory? If the latter, I'm not sure that I wholly agree. (Hell, I'm not sure I wholly agree with the former either yet.)

For example, a bird. Now surely many, if not most, people will see beauty in the appearance and flight of a swallow? That's the thing...what "taught" us to appreciate it thus? Is it merely the pleasant memory of our parent (whoever) saying, "look at that beautiful bird?"

That's what I'm getting at: Why do we consider things to be beautiful? Even things that have no (apparent) value to us?

--A

Avatar wrote:what "taught" us to appreciate it thus? Is it merely the pleasant memory of our parent (whoever) saying, "look at that beautiful bird?"

I'd say yes.

Perhaps this could be combined with a genetic adaptation to a certain habitat. After all, considering how short our evolutionary history is, I suppose we could all be wired to think, that Africa or "Africaesque" phenomena are beautiful

They are beautiful.

Aah, on one level, I can see the sense of that "learned" response to beauty...although I must then ask about the origin of it.

Who first decided what was naturally beautiful and taught their offspring that it was so? And what prompted that first decision? Awe at the power of nature to destroy us? A primitive "worshipfulness"? The "magic" of nature?

On another level, I find it a touch disappointing in terms of answers.

Why is a sunrise beautiful? Because we didn't die in the night?

--A

Avatar wrote: Why is a sunrise beautiful? Because we didn't die in the night?

--A

Common sense tells me that this is most likely the case. On the other hand, why would a waterfall or even wild river be beautiful under those terms? Can't fish it, can't go near it, but it's still beautiful.

I remember reading somewhere that we were genetically predisposed to finding beauty in the opposite sex.

According to the article, humans look for symmetry in features, somehow that alerts us to good genes. Also, men look for wide hips, for probable childbearing reasons.

On the other hand, (the "eternal" other hand, hehe) it is clear to me that beauty is also learned. Hollywood's latest trends, for example. When it comes to clothing, I can look back ten years and CRINGE at what I wore so proudly back then.

So my opinion is that our perception of beauty is a little bit of nature and a little bit of nurture.

I know this thread is meant to include nature, and why we find some things beautiful and some things not, but really, I can hardly think of anything in nature that is not beautiful. Whether snow and ice, oceans, the green, green grass of summer, well, its all beautiful to me.

Has anyone really seen a bad sunset? I've seen ones more glorious than others, but I truly cannot remember an ugly sunset.

Why do we find nature beautiful? Perhaps because without nature, we wouldn't be here?

I can buy that appreciating natural beauty is genetic, but what about unnatural beauty? Why do some people find sparkly things to be beautiful? Why is a city skyline at twilight beautiful? Why is a line of cars, their brakelights on, bending around a curve on the interstate, beautiful? We certainly don't have cars in our genetic memory... or do we, after even so short a time? Is the appreciation of unnatural beauty learned? But what about someone who has not been taught to find the city beautiful, but does so anyway?

Do we appreciate unnatural beauty because it mimics natural beauty? Are those brakelights a substitute for a nice sunset? Is that skyscraper a substitute for a mountain or cliff? Or is there another reason?

Just throwing out questions.

alynna queries...
Do we appreciate unnatural beauty because it mimics natural beauty? Are those brakelights a substitute for a nice sunset? Is that skyscraper a substitute for a mountain or cliff? Or is there another reason?

i don't know, but i like the question...
looking out over the night hills of San Francisco all lit up and sparkling does look like stars or lightning bugs to me, no lemme see if i can do better than that, it looks like LIFE to me...life is beauty, does that make sense? i can't address this subject from a scientific standpoint, and i don't want to...

(This topic is one that I've spent a lot of time thinking about. I will take the dare presented here, and mention a few of my thoughts. Although I will suffer from not knowing where to start unraveling the Gordian knot which I contain ...)

I cannot help but notice, Avatar, the candidate you chose for beauty in the opening of this topic. The African Landscape. I'm assuming here, but not much, to imagine you're thinking of the vistas, the greenery, the skies, perhaps the homes of people who live simply. As opposed to citiscapes, airports, and shopping districts. Right?

Now, I read a lot of Samuel R Delany. And if you read much of him, you'll discover that the world is filled with signs. Not billboard signs. People signs. When you walk or drive down a street where people live, and if you look around, you naturally do things like wonder who lives in that house, or why they painted it that color, or how the fence got broken, and do they like living in this neighborhood, and where can I get a mailbox like that, and do they ever open the shades in front, did anyone else ever notice that the eave is crooked, and ... etc ... etc ... The world where we dwell, even our own homes, is filled with all of these signs, about us, about our family, about our neighbors, about strangers. Our minds are built to find these signs, to process these signs, to react to these signs.

Urban areas are the extreme. A city is not a town only bigger, it's something completely different. Because you're world is filled with more people you don't know, and more kinds of people you don't know, and they all leave signs that you cannot frequently understand, but which you're mind still wonders about.

Gosh. If you think about it, our mind absorbs a lot of stuff about the the other people around us.

Here's a fun thing I found once. It's a list of words. The object is to look at the list and say aloud the colors that the words are written in. As fast as you can. Ready? Go!

• green
  red
  brown
  yellow
  purple
  black
  orange
  blue
  white

Okay, now look at the list again and read aloud the words, as fast as you can. Ready? Go!

If your a normal person, you'll discover that it's easier to read the words than it is to identify their colors. It's almost as if you have to fight yourself not to read the words in order to think about something else.

Think about that. After a certain point growing up, reading - a gimic of our culture, with no evolutionary referrent - becomes second nature. It's more instinctual than instinct!

As if our brains are wired to be re-wired by our culture and society.

(Okay, Wayfriend, you are all over the map now. Let's pull it all together.)

If you think about being wired to be re-wired by culture and society, think about applying the concept to those signs I meantioned. The processes of noticing and interpreting these signs becomes wired into you, too. You have to fight yourself not to do it. In fact, you do it all the time, subconcsiously; like breathing, we can be conscious of it for a time if we choose. (Culture shock? Too few signs we understand, too many we don't.)

So is it so hard to figure out why we consider nature to be beautiful? There are no signs! The unconscious part of your mind which is continually looking for signs, continually interpretting signs ... suddenly comes up empty. The information channel is shut down ... the pressure eases ... brain cells are freed up for other tasks ...

... and we like it.

An excellent post WayFriend. I think I'm going to read Dhalgren again.

Yes, I was talking about natural beauty, the vistas etc. Perhaps especially the vistas in fact. (The homes of people who live simply here, I'm afraid, generally means the homes of those in poverty though. In or near the city that usually means rundown tin shacks, constructed out of whatever s available. Although, there can be a sort of poignant beauty to them as well, quite different from the kraals of the rural hinterlands.)

Much as I like your idea about the reason we appreciate natural beauty, it immediately raises two questions...

First, what about the beauty that can be inherent in man-made things? Whether art, which is a very deliberate sign itself, or in the simple flow of the everyday and ordinary as Alynna so astutely pointed out?

And second, has mankind always percieved (unconsciously or not) these signs? Hmm, I could answer that by saying yes, to a certain, although perhaps lesser, extent. But what signs were bombarding primitive mans brain to such an extent that freedom from them taught him to appreciate beauty?

(Hmm, did primitive man appreciate it? Or at least, did he appreciate the beauty of nature? Anybody know what the first recorded landscape was? Nature was his sign...something that provided life, and death with an instants inattention.)

What about when their weren't so many people around us to absorb stuff from? Or is that part of it? The "memory" of when there weren't so many signs?

I don't have answers here...just throwing out more questions like Alynna.

LuciMay...It is life. Thousands, millions of lives, passing their seconds. Doing what they need to do, thinking, feeling, suffering, hoping dreaming. To me, it's a profoundly disturbing thought really, and one which that particular type of beauty that you mention almost always awakens in me. The sight is beautiful. The life behind it is a little more difficult to quantify.

Great posts guys.

--Avatar

the end of the Wayfriend post:

So is it so hard to figure out why we consider nature to be beautiful? There are no signs! The unconscious part of your mind which is continually looking for signs, continually interpretting signs ... suddenly comes up empty. The information channel is shut down ... the pressure eases ... brain cells are freed up for other tasks ...

... and we like it.

doesn't really suffice here, Wayfriend. once again, i have to say brilliant.


and then Av...

LuciMay...It is life. Thousands, millions of lives, passing their seconds. Doing what they need to do, thinking, feeling, suffering, hoping dreaming. To me, it's a profoundly disturbing thought really, and one which that particular type of beauty that you mention almost always awakens in me. The sight is beautiful. The life behind it is a little more difficult to quantify.

but the stories, Av...ah, the stories.



edit to say: nice posting all around in this thread, good idea Av!

The stories, I'll admit to being fascinated by. All stories. But even looking at it like that is a diminishment of the reality. It still almost denies the essential humanity of those events to see them as stories, if you know what I mean. It's just a more PC coping mechanism than my flat out dislike for acknowledging their reality.

--A

The stories, I'll admit to being fascinated by. All stories. But even looking at it like that is a diminishment of the reality.

do you really think so? i'm resistant to this idea. convince me.


It still almost denies the essential humanity of those events to see them as stories, if you know what I mean.

not at all. explain. to me, the humanity is the beauty. negative and positive, the whole. all of all stories. are you thinking i mean to trivialize them thinking of them as "fictions"?

Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of "fiction," although it's not to say that you mean to trivialise them. (Nor in fact that you do...but when you mentioned "stories" I thought of something not quite real.

Perhaps I merely project my own issues onto you there. I don't feel much empathy, hence my own struggle with accepting the reality of each of those lives that will never instersect with mine. Hell, even those who do still appear to me as bit players, if you know what I mean. I know, intellectually, that they're not. But not emotionally. Or very rarely at least. Call me callous if you like.

--A

I just want to say this has been a beautiful discussion about beauty. I haven't come by the Close in months, but sane and thoughtful threads like this one (er, as opposed to the insane and thoughtless ones, I suppose) make this forum still worth visiting.

I have no deep insights to add. I just find it fascinating that Africa is a continent brimming with so much staggering natural beauty, while at the same time burdened by so much staggering human suffering, what with the AIDS epidemic--among other things. Both Africa's natural beauty and human ugliness are, if I may say so, transcendent things that I will likely never experience in person. On a purely selfish level, if given the chance to go to Africa, I'd rather go see the beauty than deal with the ugliness. So would that make me a shallow human being for wanting to spend money on a sightseeing tour rather than spending money on saving starving children? I'm not sure I want to know.

This is at a tangent to the topic at hand, but I'm sure Avatar doesn't mind too much if his topics get derailed as long his name gets mentioned by the offending party in the course of the hijacking post.

can't fault you Av, I feel almost no empathy or sympathy. I find it easier to connect with animals than people.