When there are big disagreements about what,
what is good or bad in architecture or art,
often there will be someone who likes to close the discussion quickly by saying:
Beauty is in the eyes of the observer.
It’s a phrase that has the power to silence.
Once it is said, it may seem like to add anything else,
would be gross or even impolite.
But the notion that beauty could be totally subjective,
is in fact controversial, wrong, and quite dangerous.
For starters – no one believes it.
In the extreme case, we can at least say,
that some things are simply uglier than others.
And with a look at tourism statistics,
that some places attract millions of people because they are more beautiful than others.
If the will of the majority can be respected in politics,
then it should be respected even in aesthetics.
Even in controversial cases, at least some kind of agreement can be approached
with the help of careful and patient argumentation.
After all, we do so in the case of other major topics,
such as how to manage the economy or how to rate hospitals.
Or decide which of the two restaurants will be better.
We may not reach a conclusion that is scientifically based,
but non-scientific consensus can also be acceptable.
We do not need laboratory analysis to prove the importance of the family,
Shakespeare’s Intelligence or the Grace of the Alps.
So why insist on the beauty of art and architecture
can not have a clear opinion?
The answer to this question is a bit frosty.
People who meet our doubts about beauty,
fit into one particular group.
Building developers.
It is very convenient for them to operate in a company,
whose members are not confident in assessing whether,
whether they are beautiful or ugly.
If there is no objective scale of beauty,
then you can do virtually whatever you want in town or country.
Which is much cheaper.
We should not leave some doubtful places in the beauty assessment,
for example, whether this or that chair is nicer or uglier,
to overshadow broader arguments and lead us to a frivolous view,
that all beauty is always relative.
We must learn to promote publicly and sensitively those things,
where most of us see that they are actually more beautiful.
In order not to be used
and did not end up sentenced to life in an unfriendly environment,
which painfully becomes the standard.
what is good or bad in architecture or art,
often there will be someone who likes to close the discussion quickly by saying:
Beauty is in the eyes of the observer.
It’s a phrase that has the power to silence.
Once it is said, it may seem like to add anything else,
would be gross or even impolite.
But the notion that beauty could be totally subjective,
is in fact controversial, wrong, and quite dangerous.
For starters – no one believes it.
In the extreme case, we can at least say,
that some things are simply uglier than others.
And with a look at tourism statistics,
that some places attract millions of people because they are more beautiful than others.
If the will of the majority can be respected in politics,
then it should be respected even in aesthetics.
Even in controversial cases, at least some kind of agreement can be approached
with the help of careful and patient argumentation.
After all, we do so in the case of other major topics,
such as how to manage the economy or how to rate hospitals.
Or decide which of the two restaurants will be better.
We may not reach a conclusion that is scientifically based,
but non-scientific consensus can also be acceptable.
We do not need laboratory analysis to prove the importance of the family,
Shakespeare’s Intelligence or the Grace of the Alps.
So why insist on the beauty of art and architecture
can not have a clear opinion?
The answer to this question is a bit frosty.
People who meet our doubts about beauty,
fit into one particular group.
Building developers.
It is very convenient for them to operate in a company,
whose members are not confident in assessing whether,
whether they are beautiful or ugly.
If there is no objective scale of beauty,
then you can do virtually whatever you want in town or country.
Which is much cheaper.
We should not leave some doubtful places in the beauty assessment,
for example, whether this or that chair is nicer or uglier,
to overshadow broader arguments and lead us to a frivolous view,
that all beauty is always relative.
We must learn to promote publicly and sensitively those things,
where most of us see that they are actually more beautiful.
In order not to be used
and did not end up sentenced to life in an unfriendly environment,
which painfully becomes the standard.
Please follow and like us: