It has become popular to think that there are no principles behind the creation of beautiful works of art – that the tastes of each individual are valid and no person’s more than another’s. Thus the most inane scenes, should the eye be the judge, haunt the walls and the most outlandish structures clutter the halls of our institutions once dedicated to that phenomena called “Art”.
From our concert halls cacophonic nightmares that would drive dogs mad and children out of the room blast our ears and people leap to their feet applauding wildly at the sheer genius of it all. And if you don’t like these contemporary creations it simply shows your profound lack of sophistication. You have no vision, no taste, you don’t understand ART. You just don’t grasp what the artist is Saying. Beauty is, after all, in the eyes of the beholder, the ears of the listener.
In my view, this is another of the infinitude of cases of the emporer’s golden clothes, woven from the finest imaginary threads, possessed of all the mass, the depth, the reality and meaning of sheer vacuity. Each viewer and each buyer of contemporary expression offered to the public at fantastic prices under the lofty banner of Art must under no circumstances show how little he grasps of the current movements in that ethereal, sacrosanct world. Just pay the bill and speak only praise.
How did this happen? Why is beauty so rare, and more importantly, so rarely sought in the studios of the artists and made manifest in the world in which we live? Some answers are available.
In her book, “Venus in Exile” Wendy Steiner tells us that in the early 1900′s the realm of art was hijacked by misogynistic intellectuals and beauty not only became no longer a necessary quality in art, it became undesirable as an artistic pursuit. Beauty wasn’t just abandoned, she was banished. Beauty has forever been associated with women, that ethereal, sublime compelling quality that is the aura of femininity, is recognized and appreciated by women and irresistible to men but not gay men. The very men who were now defining art.
That is part of the answer. Another part is that beauty is the single most difficult quality to achieve in every medium and all arts. It is far easier to produce something ‘original’, different, wild, clever and so on. This should be obvious. Look around; at buildings and their interiors, at clothes, personal articles, household objects, in modern museums, or, as I so often do as a landscape designer, at gardens. Are they beautiful? No, but for the few exceptions they are not.
I sometimes think I’m living in the wrong world or at the wrong time. I overshot or undershot my mark, arrived at the wrong time in the wrong place because so much of what others find acceptable or even enjoyable I do not.
Although I can like almost all genres of music, I can listen to less than one percent of what comes over the non classical radio and I don’t like a lot of the classical. I was in my mid teens when the Beatles arrived and I have never liked them. That statement is not likely to win me friends but there it is. I never heard any music in their music. Their voices – well, they hadn’t musical voices. Their words were juvenile, their melodies trite, they couldn’t really play their instruments. “I wanna hold your hand”? Good lord. What was there to like?
And this brings us to another factor behind the scarcity of beauty. The Beatles enormous success was owing to the fact that they caught the crest of the wave that swept the world at that moment in time and crashed on the shores of an eagerly awaiting America. We didn’t know what was coming and it didn’t matter. In our mass consciousness we knew that whatever was dashing across the seas toward us was going to become our standard. And it did – and it was the standard of mediocrity. What ensued was a global inculcation of that standard with “The Beatles” as its representative, at least for the younger generation.
Which is another way of saying that our standards are not high and so long as they remain at the level of mediocrity we are not going to encourage or foster creations which partake of the beautiful. We might not even recognize or appreciate them if they did show up. There have been only a few times in history and only a few places where the standards rose to high levels and beauty became, if not common, abundant. 450 BC Athens and the Italian Renaissance being the most notable but it has happened other places at different times.
The 20th and 21st century are clearly not of those times and there are those of us who suffer from the inability to accept what are supposed to be artistic creations throughout all medium and arts. I regret not being able to find music that thrills (hell, even pleases) me. I wish I could gasp in delight at those things in the modern museums. I wish I had more beauty in my life.
I try for it myself. In everything I make (I make a few things) and in every garden I design I am seeking to create beauty. Do I succeed? I come close, sometimes. But as anyone who has tried to create something really wonderful knows, it is not easy.
My view is that beauty remains the most compelling quality, experience, goal; and any art which truly is an art will have beauty as its most ardent pursuit. That pursuit is the purpose of this blog. Against the advice of my betters I am opening this blog to comments, that we may share our understandings and experiences with the hope of deepening both our appreciation for and our capacity to express the beautiful – perhaps even helping to bring more beauty into the world.
My realm is the world of landscapes and gardens so there will be a lot of presentations and analysis from that area but discussion and demonstrations will extend into all areas of experience – and into all the arts. You are invited to share – thoughtfully and sincerely. Any comment that strays from a sincere attempt to contribute to the ongoing discussion of the pursuit of beauty will not be accepted and the commenter blocked from further comments.
I will keep this page up for now and to get this process started I have posted a piece on the principle of harmony and contrast. You’ll find it to the right, under Design Principles.
Keith Davitt
I just finished reading your comments on ‘Beauty’…very thought provoking. I am newly married (we’re both 63) and we now live in Buckeye, Arizona. We’re in a 55+ community, in a new home, with a new landscape. Although I’ve been in Arizona for 18 years, I’m a northern California girl, born & raised. I’m finding I really, really miss the “green” of all the plants and trees I once grew in California. It is common practice here in Arizona to xeriscape…you know the drill…but what bothers me most is the common practice of buzz-saw trimming bushes into unnatural rounded shapes. It horifies me! I believe a garden should look ‘natural.’ Unfortunately, my new husband actually LIKES that look, and insists on keeping even the trees trimmed and small…to protect his view of distant mountains. I love a view, but believe it is better ‘framed’ by lush greenery. In short, I guess I’m commenting because I need to figure out how to blend our two styles into something that more closely feeds my soul. I’m starving for the natural scenes I see in many of your garden plans.
Your comments would be welcome. Thanks, Carol~
Well, you have a real problem there, no question. Those clipped to absurdity shrubs (and trees?) are nauseating – clearly the advocates of such have no conception or appreciation of living nature. Maybe you should have got to know this guy better before marrying.
Anyway, maybe you can take a portion of your property and make one really lush spot just for you. Chuck xeriscaping – ban it from that section and absolutely forbid the hedge shears to come within 20 ft. of the place. And your right about the views too. Views had from all places at all times disappear – we stop seeing. Best to frame and limit so when something comes into view it is really there for us because we are really there for it. If you want to discuss this, feel free. I may have more suggestions.