there’s often someone around who very quickly closes the discussion down by saying:
“Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder”
It’s a phrase with the power to lớn silence. Once it’s been uttered, trying khổng lồ keep up a dialogue about the merits or drawbacks of certain visual things can come across as shrill, anti-social or just plain rude.
Bạn đang xem: Cae reading and use of english practice test 9 printable
This tendency lớn surrender khổng lồ relativism is a paradoxical symptom of a scientific age. Science, the most prestigious force in modern society, giao dịch in objective sầu truths. The things it passes judgement on are obviously simply not in the eye of beholders. One can’t fairlysay: ‘Well I don’t really feel that way about the boiling point of water or the nature of gravity.’ We have to be subservient lớn the facts science hands down lớn us.
Yet because notions of beauty and ugliness lie outside the system of scientific proof, it’s routinely assumed that they must then lie in a realm of total relativism – & that no progress whatsoever can be made towards arriving at better or worse answers about what looks good. The certainties of science have sầu – unwittingly – made sensible debate in the humanities feel imperious and redundant.
However, the phrase ‘beauty lies in the eye of the beholder’ is in reality almost always unwarranted và deeply troublesome. It should, in our view, be avoided at all costs.
For a start, no one really believes in it to its core. We may well accept that there can be legitimate differences in taste within a reasonable spectrum; but we don’t actually think that all tastes are equal. If beauty simply lay in the eye of beholders, then it would presumably be sane khổng lồ st& up & assert that a rubbish dump smelling of urine and decomposing fecal matter was a lovely place:
And that these modern canal side houses in Amsterdam were hideous:
And it might then be logical to lớn suggest that it would be OK lớn pull down the houses và replace them with a rubbish dump.
But of course, no one would want that – which shows that, in reality, we don’t actually believe sầu that beauty does lie entirely in the eye of beholders. We have background aesthetic principles, even if we rarely articulate them – and are correspondingly very aware of moments when our tastes might clash with those of another.
Xem thêm: 1965 Mệnh Gì Và Phong Thủy Hợp Mệnh Tuổi 1965, Sinh Năm 1965 Mệnh Gì, Tuổi Gì Và Hợp Màu Gì
When we use the phrase, what we seem khổng lồ be trying to lớn say is that there should be a lot of room for intelligent disagreement around aesthetics – and that we don’t feel comfortable about asserting the superiority of any one style or approach over any other. It implies an axinh tươi sensitivity khổng lồ conflict and a fear of being rude or mean khổng lồ others. However, by resorting lớn the phrase, what we actually vị is unleash a stranger và more reckless situation: what we’re in effect stating is that nothing is ever really more beautiful – or uglier – than anything else.
This suggestion then has a way of implying that the whole subject is essentially trivial. After all, we’d never say that truths about the economy or justice were in the eyes of beholders only. We know that big things are at stake here – & over time, we’ve sầu come to lớn positions about the right & wrong way of approaching these topics, & are ready khổng lồ discuss & defover our ideas. We wouldn’t ever say that ‘the treatment of the poor is just a subject best left entirely to the eyes of beholders’ or ‘the best way lớn raise children is in the eyes of beholders,’ or ‘the future of the environment is in the eyes of beholders.’ We accept that there are dangers to lớn arguing in aggressive & unfruitful ways; but we are confident that there are sensible and polite ways lớn advance through these tricky yet vital debates. The same should feel true around beauty.
Partly, our reluctance khổng lồ engage in aesthetic debate seems a symptom of a lack of confidence about our own tastes. Compare the way we behave sầu over aesthetics lớn the way we behave around food & music, two fields where svào opinions và a love sầu of arguing our case come naturally. Evaluating a new South-Asian restaurant on TripAdvisor, we’d be unlikely to lớn say that ‘good restaurants just lie in the stomachs of eaters.’ We’d have a point of view; we’d want lớn point out why place A was good, but place B was perhaps lacking in terms of its use of spices. We’d be opinionated, in interesting ways. Similarly, we would seldom say that music was in the ears of beholders, we’d have confidence in asserting that (say) Mozart had an edge over ‘The Wheels on the Bus go round & round’ or London Grammar over the Verve sầu. We’re not here wanting khổng lồ assert that one musician is better than another; we’re simply pointing khổng lồ the legitimacy và interest of the debate và khổng lồ the odd refusal even to start such a discussion in relation khổng lồ architecture & art. Our neutral stance on aesthetics seems a symptom more of tentative taste than of any true commitment khổng lồ relativism.
Furthermore, though calling for an end to lớn discussion about beauty may seem a kindly, generous move, it is extremely convenient for property developers to operate in a society that has no confidence in people’s ability to make judgments about whether or not things are beautiful or monstrous. It means these cash-conscious types don’t have to lớn worry about going lớn the expense of trying to make anything look good: because no one knows what that is anyway!
The phrase ‘beauty lies in the eye of the beholder’ originally came lớn prominence as a shield to protect us against snobbery.
It asserted the rights of ordinary people to follow their enthusiasms at a time when high-handed experts held the cultural reins & tried khổng lồ shape taste with stern & belittling authority. These experts told people what to lượt thích và treated dissent with disdain. The phrase ‘beauty lies in the eye of the beholder’ was a defense against intolerance. It meant something like: ‘Stop trying lớn badger me inlớn submission. My preferences are my personal Hotline. I can think & feel as I lượt thích.’
But given that the freedom to lớn think and feel as we like is now verywell enshrined (indeed, perhaps too well enshrined), we don’t need to stay stuchồng at the early liberating move sầu.
Our day-to-day problem isn’t that we’ll be bossed around by cultural snobs, it’s that the chances of attractive sầu art và architecture taking hold will be lost,because of a culture obsessed by quichồng profits & a refusal to lớn engage architects & artists in a dialogue about what they’re up khổng lồ. Closing conversation down with‘beauty lies in the eye of the beholder’ can make an already tricky situation far worse. A society that can’t talk sensibly, publicly và perhaps at length, about beauty will inadvertently condemn itself lớn ugliness.