[Giotto - The kiss of Judas. Complete work and detail]
But what is beauty and ugliness in art? For many seem paradoxical considering that Art is about ugly things, and you have the mistaken idea that art is beauty, and last but not least, synonymous with prestige and status.
utterly false.
art although it has on the beautiful and wonderful, also talks about the limits of human weaknesses, what you have, how terrible, what can not say with words. Talk about ugly things, ugly situations.
But the ugly and the beautiful natural that could be located in a world a priori, are not the same to the artistic beauty and ugliness. Both concepts developed over time, they had different dynamics.
The concept of beauty, changing according to the paradigm, arguably always been connected to the harmony and proportion, ie the mathematical, measurable and scalable.
Greek architecture, functionalist, Baroque, Renaissance, when art in the collective benefit of adjectives related to beauty, and that obviously appeals to the measurable: the Greek golden section, the Le modulor Corbusier, clear and Cartesian axes in Renaissance painting, nature embellished mathematicians in gardens of Versailles.
[Parthenon Hellenic classical architecture] [Modulor Le Corbusier] [Gardens of Versailles]
But the ugly involves a different process .
In ancient times, Aristotle in his Poetics, think about what is ugly. If laughter is related to this phenomenon is the subject of comedy is laughable what a blunder which is painless, it is not fatal. Idea that we could agree to this day is effective. What happens at the absurdity laughable that curiously reverses the question of the monster, the first ugly art, constructed by changing the scale, composition or absurd, evidenced in the sculpture of antiquity: the sphinx.
[The monster: the first ugly art displayed in the Egyptian Sphinx] [Composition absurd in a Magritte painting]
Ugly related to atrocious, with the miserable, as a crime, is the subject of tragedy. Aristotle said about the ugly in art production, unpleasant things of nature, when they are copied in the artistic field, causing pleasure, an "ugly" natural, proves to be a "beautiful" aesthetic. The Raft of the Medusa by Géricault, is a clear example of tragedy hand embellished by the artist. Shipwrecked on a raft, withstood the storms, hunger, death and finally, the fact that they had to eat each other to survive.
[Géricault - The Raft of the Medusa]
In the Middle Ages, the idea for the ugly as art object, it becomes important from a pedagogical point, that transgresses is punished will be condemned to hell as shown in the painting of Fra Angelico, the final trial, a right good will winning in a world of harmony, happiness and glory, how terrible is available to the left, with scenes featuring grotesque demons and sinners.
[Fra Angelico - The Final Judgement. Complete work and detail]
Thomas Aquinas
entitles you to the beautiful with its concept: integrity, proportion and harmony. Integrity is understood as a whole, where the ugly is in itself a derivation of the beautiful, which is not integrated up to the ugly, so both the unfinished and maimed. The concept of the ugly, is not explicit, but comes from the reflection on the concept of beauty exposed clearly.
Although the condition of "ugly" has been treated throughout history, it is Kant who gives him a right in the space of art, and who says keeping the ideas of Aristotle, the art beautiful things beautifully describes the nature could be ugly, storms, wars, can be represented beautifully.
Moreover, today it is difficult to separate terms just beautiful - ugly. The ugly may have a fee so strong appeal as the beautiful, considering that the beautiful and sinister combination offer a strong suggestion.
Some authors consider that the limit of the sublime beauty is the sinister, considering the claim as a condition for aesthetic effect, but for this beautiful aesthetic, the claim must be hidden because its disclosure would produce ipso facto, the breaking of this effect.
A terrible what happened before, it is this sublime beauty that surrounds them, that captivates the end that one step further, will have caused disaster: scenes of love so perfect and attractive, causing death and tragedy, or scenes perfect compositions that border on the irresistible, like Botticelli's Birth of Venus, whose composition in light movement, shows this perfect and beautiful Venus, born into a shell but the edge of the imbalance, it does not stand the center of it, is about to collapse.
No paint like Botticelli, to give a clear example of the beauty canonical art history. There is chance that the history of painting revolves around a terrible situation of adultery and pain: the model, Botticelli's wife poses nude for painting commissioned by her lover's own Medici. She and her husband provided a morbid game of the patrons. Years later, she will die of pneumonia, overwhelmed, deformed, and not as her husband's beautifully represented in seduction commissioned by Medici.
[Botticelli - Birth of Venus. Complete work and detail]
"We could say that beauty and ugliness are not categories per se, but truth in its movement, and its existence depends on the weather. The beauty and ugliness are forces ontological ontological realities. Integrates the beautiful ugly, but ugly renewed beauty. "
sources:
- OLIVERAS, Elena, the question of art Aesthetics, Emecé Editores, Buenos Aires, 2007
- ZÁTONYI, Marta , aesthetics of art and design of image and sound, Kliczkowsky, Buenos Aires 2002, 5 th edition
- ZÁTONYI, Marta, art and creation. The paths of the aesthetic, intellectual capital, Buenos Aires 2007, 1 edition
0 comments:
Post a Comment