Re: [microsound] return of metaphysics

[tionlee@xxxxxxx]

i personally think that bueaty is power
-t

-------------- Original message from GrahamWakefield <graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: -------------- 


> There are many kinds of beauty, or rather, many ways to behold beauty. The 
> kind of beauty beheld that equates to truth is no more oppressive and 
> exclusive than your idea of opposing it with an aesthetics of failure. 
> 
> What I find most beautiful of all is that which transcends such divisions, a 
> beauty not found by diverging from the existent (because divergence will 
> only find more of the existent) but found by creating/discovering something 
> completely beyond the +/- of the existent. I would hope that a post-x 
> aesthetics would focus on this kind of beauty if it cares to name it beauty. 
> 
> On 19/11/04 9:39 am, "tasty radish" wrote: 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > "interesting point.. please consider that beauty, 
> > understood as an harmonic construction of the whole, 
> > occurs as a mechanism to eliminate those parts not 
> > fitting into this concept. it causes oppression and 
> > exclusion. the root of it all may be the equalization 
> > of beauty and truth, already present in platos 
> > thinking, and still alive today... its the never 
> > ending return of that metaphysical idea that there 
> > has to be a good, true and beautiful whole that gives 
> > sense to its parts. through the centuries a lot of 
> > people tried to work against this normative 
> > concept..postmodernism claimed its death...with little 
> > success.. 
> > isn?t an "aesthetics of failiure" a concept opposed to 
> > that of "beauty".. if we use failiure to construct 
> > just another homogenous structure - wouldn?t it be 
> > easier to keep the old one? 
> > to define our "postmodern" aesthetics we should think 
> > of concepts based on divergence, not beauty... " 
> > 
> > beautifully said! ;) . (perhaps there can be a new 
> > almost monstorous beauty born from the break from the 
> > whole, as that breaks open, akin to kierkegard's sorta 
> > wild sense of the cosmos-God) 
> > 
> > question regarding aesthetics of failure-> do folks 
> > find that this sensibility is romantic? I do at 
> > times, and think that when it goes this route, it is 
> > pretty conventional activity (in so far as it what it 
> > triggers or opens up in terms of dimensions at a 
> > perceptual level). 
> > -andrew 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________ 
> > Do you Yahoo!? 
> > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! 
> > http://my.yahoo.com 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > website: http://www.microsound.org 
> > 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> website: http://www.microsound.org 
>