This is one potential consequence of obsessing over aesthetics—but as I continue to enjoy art, I've also realized that the point is not the representation of the beautiful, but beautiful representation regardless of content.https://twitter.com/liminal_warmth/status/1228051010297327616 …
This may sound like pure sentimentality, claiming that "everyone's beautiful on the inside," but it's more that you take human perception and symbolism as the object of your studies instead of individual people.
-
-
At a certain point in trying to figure out how to make things look pretty, there is this leap from the exact content (canons of proportion, shapely anatomy, etc.) to abstractions of shape, light, and color.
Show this thread -
When I look at the works of some of my favorite artists, it is as if they became *incapable* of conveying perception that is without beauty—or if not beauty, some form of aesthetic appeal beyond the literal vision of a camera.pic.twitter.com/nOA4R2dHqg
Show this thread -
It's true that many people will prefer to just look at traditional representations of beauty. I definitely enjoy glamorous portraits by artists like Sargent or Mucha as well, and in a sense, starting with a beautiful subject means that half of your work is done for you.
Show this thread -
But it isn't the only way to see other people, or to see yourself. (It helps that I disconnected the need to render / understand beauty from the need to embody it within myself, at least.)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.