Aesthetics

Aesthetics

The artist retires from the world to find meaning in it. Only then does he realize the tumultuous repercussions of the conscience in the world. The majority of all our thoughts are subjugated to our imagination, our subjective perception of what an object has the capability to be. Take for example, the idea of beauty. What is beauty?

We can only assume the plausibility that a universal definition of beauty exists because there is a common subjective thread of what beauty is. Thus, through a common subjective basis of what beauty is, we can acknowledge that a universal beauty can exist. And if it can exist and can be comprehended by the human mind, it does exist, at least in figurative terms. However, this thread of beauty lies not in the whatness of an object, but is wrapped by imagination's cloth. In other words, beauty is represented in the imagination. First of all, in order for something to be beautiful, one has to first acknowledge that the object has the potential to be beautiful. In order for this to be possible, one has to intuitively grasp that the object does exist, again, in figurative terms. Beauty thus becomes the relation of the object with the audience, a mental and sensual connection between both sides. My understanding of this is similar to aura, and is entirely created by imagination. An object, in its material plane would carry no beauty at all by this definition, because radiance does not exist materially, only in imagination.

Thus, we can conclude that beauty is not material. So far, we have defined what beauty is not. So what makes an object beautiful? Three things, Integritas, consonantia, and claritas (claritas is what I explained above as radiance). They go along with what I said before. I am going to attempt to explain these terms in the simplest way possible. Integritas, or integrity, simply means that you can comprehending the object wholly separate from what it is not. It exists as something, self bounded an conceivable. Simple enough. Consonantia (or harmony) is, as Joyce describes, the rhythm of its structure, or as he says, "the synthesis of immediate perception is followed by an analysis of apprehension". In other words, you saw it, now you grasp it for what it is. Not a difficult concept to understand if you can imagine something seen from the eyes of a dog, and then to a human. The difference between the two understandings of the same object is that the human can grasp its existence as more than its concrete and physical structure. A gateway to imagination. In relation to what I wrote before, it can come closest to the acknowledgement that it has the potential to be beautiful. The last idea is claritas. Claritas simply means the imagination one uses to intiate the whatness of the object. Where the object becomes more than it actually is. These simple words do not give it justice for what is actually is, but for the sake of understanding, it is so.

When those three aspects come into play, an object can be considered beautiful. It really happens so fast, we don't notice these things happening. Note, this is only my understanding of what beauty is, from what I learned from others and literature. It may not be entirely correct. I just wanted to organize what I thought could be the universal definition of beauty, simply because an objective definition must exist in order for a proper subjective idea of it to exist.

So what of all of this? The world is entirely what the mind makes of it. If the imagination is weak and not able to comprehend or make sense of the world, that mind is subjugated to a less meaningful existence. However, even meaning is created in the mind, so life could be as meaningful as you make it. But to find the greatest fulfillment, and a most understanding and meaning in what the world is, life must be apprehended in a meaningful manner. Think of it as a pyramid on which you can only view from the top down. The people in the middle see what is below them, and what is below them is all they know. What is below them is as meaningful as it could ever be, but only to the extent that it is still the middle of the pyramid. The ones near the top however, can see the entire structure and can find full meaning in a much broader spectrum and understanding of is below them. Thus it is more meaningful. So I'm just saying. Get out of the box, notice the details and try to make the most out of the life you live. There is much more to living life then simply... whatever it is that we as humans do.

* * *

Excuse my last post. It was really all sarcasm, and I didn't mean many of the things I said. Everything had to be taken with a grain of salt (like most of the things I say). I was harsh and full of conceit, albeit I always found my reaction not to be one entirely of animosity, but more of gratitude toward whatever it was that triggered those emotions. But am I so arrogant, or so superficially deep? Well, to put it bluntly, no I am not. Maybe arrogant, but not superficially deep. See, there is no "superficial deep". Superficial depth is still shallow.

Some people think that they are deeply superficial, but in fact, they are only superficially deep. In a bad way. Did Warhol say that? I don't remember.