Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Beauty, Art and Appearance

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:39 pm

perpetualburn wrote:
The incorrigible desire to reconnect with the source of creation/destruction (woman).  Art losing significance and regaining significance in the endless search for woman.  Art as maybe just a byproduct of the eternal attempts to close distance.


If Woman is Be-ing, eternity, and Man is forever a Be-coming...,
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." [Proust]

Art can be what Else that Distance can give you, without trying to even 'want to' close it.
Good desire is Greek desire, and it stops at the surface;

Nietzsche wrote:
"One should have more reverence for the shame-facedness with which nature has concealed herself behind enigmas and motley uncertainties. Perhaps truth is a woman who has reasons for not showing her reasons? Perhaps her name is Baubo, to speak in Greek?... Oh, those Greeks! They knew how to live: for that purpose it is necessary to keep bravely to the surface, the fold and the skin; to worship appearance, to believe in forms, tones, and words, in the whole Olympus of appearance! Those Greeks were superficial - from profundity ! And are we not coming back precisely to this point, we dare-devils of the spirit, who have scaled the highest and most dangerous peak of contemporary thought, and have looked around us from it, have looked down from it? Are we not precisely in this respect Greeks? Worshippers of forms, of tones, and of words? And precisely on that account artists?"[JW]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:40 pm

perpetualburn wrote:
Orpheus in pop music:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



Eurydice?...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:09 pm

Lyssa wrote:
perpetualburn wrote:
   The incorrigible desire to reconnect with the source of creation/destruction (woman).  Art losing significance and regaining significance in the endless search for woman.  Art as maybe just a byproduct of the eternal attempts to close distance.



If Woman is Be-ing, eternity, and Man is forever a Be-coming...,
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." [Proust]

Art can be what Else that Distance can give you, without trying to even 'want to' close it.
Good desire is Greek desire, and it stops at the surface;

Lyssa wrote:
Nietzsche will Not look back to cling to the past... he "knows", willing the future he envisions will definitely have his euryDike, the past eternally-recur in contrast to the orphic reincarnation mysteries.

Is it the nature with Eros that desire demands one attempt to close the distance?

When I wrote that I wasn't thinking that in wanting to close the distance, you want to close the distance forever, or that in attempting to close the distance you're not perpetually dumbfounded when the object keeps slipping away... maybe the energy(tension) from this thought process of reaching fuels interpretations... The "wanting" to close it while you "know" you can't seems at the heart of the paradox, of the tension...it almost seems like you'd be giving something up of your core in not "wanting" to.  And in "knowing" you can't truly close the distance, you don't really want to(because that would be like voluntarily giving up the tension that helps you give to that which you want)... Yet you still "want"....I'm not sure that can/should be considered "clinging" either...insomuch as the process doesn't depend on getting the object.  Or maybe that's just an artist and not a philosopher.

Lyssa wrote:
The new Orpheus knows no 'turning back' to all that's been "lost"; there's an icy Distrust only of all those things that promise of a new happiness...

Orphic redemption of all dualities, of all animosities through his songs,, is here re-instated, slavery is affirmed.

Nietzsche will Not look back to cling to the past... he "knows", willing the future he envisions will definitely have his euryDike, the past eternally-recur in contrast to the orphic reincarnation mysteries.

Orpheus should know Eurydice is always "with" him then.

Quote :
"One should have more reverence for the shame-facedness with which nature has concealed herself behind enigmas and motley uncertainties. Perhaps truth is a woman who has reasons for not showing her reasons? Perhaps her name is Baubo, to speak in Greek?... Oh, those Greeks! They knew how to live: for that purpose it is necessary to keep bravely to the surface, the fold and the skin; to worship appearance, to believe in forms, tones, and words, in the whole Olympus of appearance! Those Greeks were superficial - from profundity ! And are we not coming back precisely to this point, we dare-devils of the spirit, who have scaled the highest and most dangerous peak of contemporary thought, and have looked around us from it, have looked down from it? Are we not precisely in this respect Greeks? Worshippers of forms, of tones, and of words? And precisely on that account artists?"[JW]

Nietzsche wrote:

There is something contrary to nature in wisdom that is revealed by its hostility to art: to ask for knowledge where illusion alone gives deliverance, salvation - this in-deed is perversion, the instinct for nothingness!

Quote :
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." [Proust]

There's a quote somewhere in WTP where N talks about the ability or strength to re-interpret the past, give it new meaning ( Obviously a common theme with N, but it specifically went well with that Proust quote)

I don't think it's this.. maybe it is..

Nietzsche wrote:
That the value of the world lies in our interpretation (--that other interpretations than merely human ones are perhaps somewhere possible--); that previous interpretations have been perspective valuations by virtue of which we can survive in life, i.e., in the will to power, for the growth of power; that every elevation of man brings with it the overcoming of narrower interpretations; that every strengthening and increase of power opens up new perspectives and means believing in new horizons--this idea permeates my writings.

Lyssa wrote:
Phaidros in Pl. Smp. 179d is scornful of Orpheus, who according to the legend was not willing to die himself in order to be with his dead wife in the underworld; he was 'faint-hearted, as you'd expect of a kitharoidos'. Misgolas 's predilection for musicians may imply a distaste on his part for young athletes and warriors of the kind portrayed in earlier vase-painting

More of the same:

Quote :
In the model Phaedrus presents, it is erôs which “generates that extreme philia which leads to self-sacrifice” (Dover 1980 93).  It is clear that in this case Phaedrus envisions Alcestis as an erastês and Admetus as the object of her lover.  For a woman to be characterized in this way in classical Greek literature is highly unusual, and at the very least, aberrant ( women, like boys, were means to be objects, not subject of erôs).  According to Phaedrus’ argument, erôs is so powerful that it can motivate even women to perform extraordinary acts.

Orpheus is presented as a counterexample – he was not brave enough to die for his beloved and so the gods rejected his supplication.  Phaedrus then says it was Achilles who provided the greatest example of self-sacrifice motivated by love by dying for Patroclus.   Although Achilles’ divine mother Thetis had told him that his own death would follow soon after killing the Trojan Prince Hector, he still chose to avenge Patroclus by doing so, and in that sense sacrificed his life for him (179e).  Phaedrus believes that it was this act which led the gods to honor Achilles and send him to the μακάρων νῆσοι, the “Islands of the Blessed,” because for an erômenos to die for his erastês is an extraordinary thing.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Thu Jan 16, 2014 6:07 pm

Lyssa wrote:


Quote :
"They wish to "cultivate" her in general still more, and intend, as they say, to make the "weaker sex" STRONG by culture: as if history did not teach in the most emphatic manner that the "cultivating" of mankind and his weakening--that is to say, the weakening, dissipating, and languishing of his FORCE OF WILL--have always kept pace with one another, and that the most powerful and influential women in the world (and lastly, the mother of Napoleon) had just to thank their force of will--and not their schoolmasters--for their power and ascendancy over men. That which inspires respect in woman, and often enough fear also, is her NATURE, which is more "natural" than that of man, her genuine, carnivora-like, cunning flexibility, her tiger-claws beneath the glove, her NAIVETE in egoism, her untrainableness and innate wildness, the incomprehensibleness, extent, and deviation of her desires and virtues.
That which, in spite of fear, excites one's sympathy for the dangerous and beautiful cat, "woman," is that she seems more afflicted, more vulnerable, more necessitous of love, and more condemned to disillusionment than any other creature. Fear and sympathy it is with these feelings that man has hitherto stood in the presence of woman, always with one foot already in tragedy, which rends while it delights--What? And all that is now to be at an end? And the DISENCHANTMENT of woman is in progress? The tediousness of woman is slowly evolving? Oh Europe! Europe! We know the horned animal which was always most attractive to thee, from which danger is ever again threatening thee! Thy old fable might once more become "history"--an immense stupidity might once again overmaster thee and carry thee away! And no God concealed beneath it--no! only an "idea," a "modern idea"!" [BGE, 239]

You could also compare her [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] nature to your earlier comment,

Perpetual wrote:
The male form arouses the feeling of temperance itself. It's more concrete, angular and statuesque in appearance. A woman's form seems more deceptive, necessarily, and arouses the most extreme emotions. Everything about a woman's form is meant to draw you in and spit you back out. It can be both the most intoxicating and most abject thing. A man's form is more reflective. A man's form build's to a peak and this is part of its beauty (short-lived as it may be). It would seem nihilistic to divorce philosophy from a love of physical beauty considering European beauty runs side by side with it.



[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Hybrids... The Sphinx...


Beauty by Charles Baudelaire

"I AM as lovely as a dream in stone,
And this my heart where each finds death in turn,
Inspires the poet with a love as lone
As clay eternal and as taciturn.

Swan-white of heart, a sphinx no mortal knows,
My throne is in the heaven's azure deep;
I hate all movements that disturb my pose,
I smile not ever, neither do I weep.

Before my monumental attitudes,
That breathe a soul into the plastic arts,
My poets pray in austere studious moods,

For I, to fold enchantment round their hearts,
Have pools of light where beauty flames and dies,
The placid mirrors of my luminous eyes."

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:34 pm

Not cosmetic surgery, but 'aesthetic surgery':

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:36 pm

Quote :
Nietzsche’s teaching of amor fati must be conceived as erotic affirmation.  The key to such an affirmation will be consummation, i.e., works not faith.  As eros, such affirmation has no part in the resignation endemic either to vulgar nihilism or to positivist determinism. Independently of one another, Howard Caygill and Tracy B. Strong have recently emphasised the secret to this teaching as what everyone, Nietzsche too, would call love.18 And yet the word of love alone is meaningless. As an erotic, Dionysian affirmation of life, Nietzschean  amor fati teaches an eros more demanding than agape and perhaps an eros even more impossible for the devotees of the cult of sexual distraction.19  Love, just love, or the idea of sex (the image of eros or pornog-raphy) is meaningless unless immediately, really affirmed in praxis, declared, enacted in what we do. Whatever one’s confessional standpoint on the ques-tion of faith and works, it is the working or the practice, that is: the act of love that counts in the real world.

Quote :
In a reading that is anything but anti-Christian, Nietzsche reads the life of
Jesus as “one of the most painful cases of the martyrdom of knowledge about love” (BGE 269 cf. 270).38  To negotiate the inadequacy of our human ability to love and the deiform infinity of desire (Cartesian, Augustinian “will”), Nietzsche dares an extraordinary question as he asks in a strained query poised within a painful series of reflections and therewith raises the hardest of ques-tions posed within and thus apart from all mockery or reproach, what it is that a god who comes to be the very God of love, would be condemned to know about love? What echoes in Nietzsche’s question here is a shattering sensi-tivity to the divine, forsaken and abandoned, a divine indigence. As the non-erotic god of love, the God of the Jews fell from nomadic jealousy and a thunder or sky-god’s vengeance to the cloying nuzzling of Christian need. Love becomes the supreme characteristic of God, thus, the need for love becomes the supreme passion, agony, or suffering of the divine. And because, this is the catch, the banal and ordinary run of humanity is anything but divine when it comes to the matter of passionate (that is the works of) love, human love has never deserved its name. Nevertheless, in the economy of seduction omni-present in eros, it will be this infinitesimal mite of human love which is to be transfigured as the measure of redemptive potential or salvation. Thus it seems – and this will be the key to Milton’s twist on the same Hesiodic eros, from Lucifer’s light to God’s deep blue sea, moving over the waters of Genesis – the somehow always embarassing sentiment of the 68 generation ideal that repeats in its enduring disappointment that the world needs love is a foregoing and foregone point of departure for Nietzsche and for every theogony and for every story of love

Quote :
What is telling is abundance, that is: potency or sovereign not slavish desire.
Immortalisation can be an apotheosis of flux and destruction can be the pre-condition for creation. Nietzsche’s consciousness of the tragic insight colors both the affirmative and the reactive dispositions of abundance and need. What-ever is replete with overflowing energy cannot be conserved – this is the economy of expenditure or expression: affirmation. The will to power that is a capacity for expression can only be given out without reserve.52 In contrast with art, knowledge merely seeks to tell itself a story: justifying and enduring its own impotence. Thus Nietzsche speaks of the gap between “know” and “can” (BGE 253) and suggests that what can act must perhaps exclude knowledge. The will lacking power is the will to power that does (and can do) nothing but conserve itself in the power it lacks, already played out, already without reserve. The difference is between the will to expend and the will to save. If no one can spend more than one has, expenditure remains the point at issue. In any case: in the economic dynamic of life as erotic love, power can only be kept if it is continually spent, lost, given out. This is the energetics of eros, the erotic dy-namic, as it is an exact economy of discharge. It is the impotence of fear which cannot imagine and can never believe that such power, such great health, “one does not merely have, but also acquires continually, and must acquire because one gives it up again and again, and must give it up” (GS 382). The course of desire sacrificed is the eternal return of the same.


Quote :
At the same moment and drawn into the same breath with which Nietzische teaches love of life, he underscores every last reason for despair, frustration, impossible desire. This is the tragic condition of life, where life always “pre-supposes suffering and sufferers.” What is transformed in the possibility of love is the disposition of suffering, a transformation as rare as that same (impossible) possibility. Only lovers fully alive to everything in life means those arched not with right feeling but by what I have deliberately been calling ‘wrong feeling,’ commanded by eros beyond themselves (not in imaginative projection) but exactly incarnate in what and how they are. Lov-ers, bodily, physically representing ‘the over-fullness of life,’ are able to de- sire the Dionysian, wholly erotic art Nietzsche consecrates as presupposing “a tragic view of life, a tragic insight.” As an erotically charged being, the lover, precisely ecstatic, can “not only afford the sight of the terrible and questionable” as a spectacle to be admired at an aesthetic distance, but such a ‘Dionysian god and man” can also face the actuality of the “terrible deed and every luxury of destruction” (GS 370)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:40 pm

Quote :
To get the young men to risk their lives in the hoplite line, the poet uses a visual
aesthetic of death, preferring the beauty of one corpse over another. An
older man who has fallen is ugly: the spectacle of his white head and grey
chin while he gasps his life out onto the sand, skin stripped naked, “holding
his bloody private parts with his own two hands,” is “ugly [aischron] to the
eyes and nemesis to see.”27 By contrast, the blossom of a youthful soldier
arouses eros in his onlookers even after he is dead (10.29–30):

To males [he is] worth gazing at; to females, lovely [eratos]
while alive, and a beauty after falling in the front ranks.

Pericles’ Funeral Oration may be said to borrow this trope from Tyrtaeus’
or related poetry: the tradition of the beautiful death.28 The ones who died
perceived that it was better to go out on top, to slip away while still at the
peak of their powers (meta romes, 2.43.6), having performed the deed that
constitutes the height of their reputation (akme tes doxes, 2.42.4), than to
outlive their prime and to be remembered as something less than they once
were. It is as if a young man had the opportunity to step into eternity, into
memory, at the moment of his own choosing, an act by which he could
make of his life exactly what he wanted, or at least what he had been taught
to want. In one stroke he makes up for all faults, as Pericles says (2.42.3), or
he simply “becomes good,” as Tyrtaeus says (12.10, 12.20West). The young
men are ripe for death and memory the way maidens are ripe for marriage;
the season is now.29

It is not so much that the young men fall in love with death as that
death is the means by which they can make the community “fall in love”
with them, or at least appreciate or esteem them. The young men seek
to become attractive; they desire to be desirable. By risking, and receiving,
death, the young citizen–soldier seeks to awaken a yearning on the part
of the community, a yearning for himself. Callinus expresses it as a laoi
sumpanti pothos (1.18West), a longing that the whole community experiences.
Because pothos is a regret or longing for things absent, early death is almost
a necessity if one is to achieve this honor; one who dies at home of old age
is simply not of equal value and cannot be missed (demoi potheinos, 14–16) in
the same way. This desire to be desirable oneself, as opposed to desiring
another person, is not eros simpliciter but a vanity or eros mixed with
thumos. The most erotic description of vanity is “a desire for a desire.”30
We may first feel eros for another person, and then, in order to be erotically
successful, a desire to be loved back. The desire to be loved back would then
be purely instrumental or utilitarian. But the desire to be loved back may
also have a life of its own, as the thumos itself does. We recognize the merit
or beauty in others that provokes our eros, and we covet those qualities
for ourselves. The aim of this desire is not physical gratification but the
inculcation of a positive idea about ourselves in the mind of another, in
short, honor.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
hǣþen

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 165
Join date : 2013-05-23
Location : Sigil

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:53 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Lest we forget that they were once/are an Indo-European people. I'm not sure how factual the video link in the link is.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Tue Feb 04, 2014 9:02 pm

"Ambiguus Sexus: Epic Masculinity in Transition in Statius' Achilleid"

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Feb 05, 2014 12:20 pm

"Homosexuality & Civilization"

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Feb 09, 2014 1:52 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:32 pm

Beauty as potentially ensnaring, beauty as instigator, imposing itself on your will …a beautiful landscape, a perfect day, perfect light, you get to a place where you can really appreciate on a very fine, distinguished rare level, you could almost die in that hard won exalted moment(you are separate from the crowd and that must mean something), but at it’s at that very moment that you feel ever more active to give back, or rather push back…doesn’t even seem like paying back for the gift of beauty as much as the intensity of the moment hits the very nerve for self-determination. Time matters most now, life isn’t just about getting to high places of appreciation and dissection…the awe of beauty in a individual might be the very point of an active/destructive/creative tenacity. The surge of beauty from outside (that intense moment of awe) produces an immediate surge (almost anger) in your will to over power any external effect that might glaze over a desire for clarity or continued active domination and organization. Beauty itself is competitive; it’s why it’s confident, why it’s noble. To be lost in beauty is to be lost from your self, to be undistinguished. Yet beauty is the distinguishing characteristic of higher types.

Beauty felt isn’t just something to be observed but recruited, put into service of your will, taken advantage of, worked with. It almost demands it be taken advantage of like a woman, that’s why it’s there. Appreciation becomes the deadly deception… Getting to comfortable places (economically or spiritually), to relax and appreciate and feign an aristocratic outlook as anti-heroic…having the time to analyze without vitality or pressing immediacy.


Watching a women dance from a distance as she entrances onlookers (has not just a visual but visceral effect(but its effect is turned inward)…Confidence/desire/competition first appears to close distance(between you and dancer and you from competitors)

Actual dancing/leading with a women (heat felt up-close (taken advantaged of, you’re leading), distance closed further (apparently, more confidently) tension higher (touching).

Sexual intercourse, greatest heat transfer, the penetration of illusion(confidence higher) only opens up the most visceral illusion, the seeming act of destroying the illusion by closing distance, cutting the tension only opens up more tension/distance…Nakedness not as a killer of illusion but, as it turns out, the most desired “illusion”, the most immediate yet faraway, the most uncooperative illusion, the wild horse. The act of overwhelming her and being overwhelmed by her reactions, stronger feedback of the flesh vs the action of touching in dancing, vs the overwhelming (passive) effect of the dancer on the onlooker where to overwhelm (active) is directly purely inward… no longer tempted at a distant illusion and re-tempting yourself, but re-tempted by the flesh, a naked flesh that re-tempts the illusion with greater intensity. Flesh as a burning illusion, a burning need for action.

Sex as either a potential killer of inspiration (sexual energy) or re-charging of energy that may rival energy obtained from abstinence... affirmation of seemingly abject in moment of loss/gain (confidence highest). Possibility of the sublimated erotic and sensual. The sexual as something playful and deadly serious.


The temptation of man for woman, woman for man
The difference in the love gambit for each
The difference in how different sexual energy is organized/ordered to types of possibly mutual beneficial heights, differences in reciprocity, mutual support(different ways of supporting) shared goals(different ways of approaching, understood by each for each) but never dull, the love/need of antagonism, cooperation isn’t an end in itself


Necessity of absorption in the masculine and feminine for each

The difference in the speed/intensity of shifting between masculine/feminine roles in a woman vs a man(based on vitality/intelligence/biological destiny) and the relation this has on how man/woman approach interaction with the opposite sex, how he/she orders himself around the other… the heroic impulse potentially rejuvenated or destroyed in gender analysis… possible feminist interpretation of female reciprocation that supports a masculine heroism as misogynist, or belittling of possible female potential… female gender shifting as possibly less intense/capable of putting herself in man’s role… male gender shifting that doesn’t swell into a heroism after intense oscillation/re-coordination as effeminate , drawn out weekend warrior type approach to gender shifting in a male that doesn’t care/consider worthwhile the biological peak of a male, “analysis can go on forever with no matter to vitality or health, that’s all that matters…Nietzsche got old and remained young/vital(his peculiar biology doesn’t matter) what matter is it to me then to not consider a time-honored male peak”

woman’s responsibility towards man, man’s responsibility to woman, gravity felt by each in determining not the least of all, character
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:23 pm

Quote :
"In the “Before Sunrise” passage of Zarathustra 3, Nietzsche sings his hymn or love-song to an Eos who is clearly figurative and “rhetorical” yet also somehow actual in her striking beauty, her immediacy, momentary presence, transience:

O heaven above me, pure and deep! You abyss of light! [Oh Himmel über mir, du Reiner! Tiefer! Du Licht-Abgrund!] Seeing you, I tremble with godlike desires. To throw myself into your height, that is my depth. To hide in your purity, that is my innocence. . . . Today you rose for me silently over the roaring sea . . . and came to me . . . shrouded in your beauty. . . . Before the sun you came to me, the loneliest of all. . . . Rather would I sit . . . in the abyss without a heaven, than see you . . . stained by drifting clouds. . . . O heaven over me, pure and light! You abyss of light! . . . “Over all things now stand the heaven Accident [der Himmel Zufall], the heaven Innocence [Unschuld], the heaven Chance [Ohngefähr], the heaven Prankishness [Übermuth].” This prankish folly I have put in the place of . . . “eternal will”. . . . That is what your purity is to me now, that there is no eternal spider or spider web of reason; that you are to me a dance floor for divine accidents, that you are to me a divine table for divine dice and dice players. But you blush? Did I speak the unspeakable? . . . Or is it the shame of twosomeness that makes you blush? Do you bid me go and be silent because the day is coming now? The world is deep—and deeper than day had ever been  aware. . . . But the day is coming, so let us part. (“Vor Sonnen-Aufgang,” KSA.24 207-210; “Before Sunrise,” Kaufmann 276-279)

In this ode to the ethereal abyss of light that is the clear cloudless sky at dawn, Nietzsche catches the mythic and “romantic” aspect of Lady Dawn, this young goddess who seduced several young male mortals, including Tithonos and Orion, the handsome hunter who upon his death became the brightest constellation in the night sky. For “Seeing you, I tremble with godlike desires [Dich schauend schaudere ich vor göttlichen Begierden].” In effect Nietzsche (or his speaker, Zarathustra) has replaced Tithonos here as the male consort and lover of Eos. Yet obviously this all-too-human speaker—like Quixote riding out on his first adventure and looking up at this lady who has deserted “the soft couch of her jealous spouse” and now appears “to mortals at the gates and balconies of the Manchegan horizon” (Cervantes 30)—is not lying beside Dawn on her horizon-couch but rather gazing up at her in wonder from the earthly world of mortal men.

The “oneness” (not “twosomeness”) and “purity” of this Dawn may suggest her virginity, self-enclosure, loneliness (“the loneliest of all”) and shyness—“is it the shame of twosomeness that makes you blush?”—but this is a purity in which the (equally shy?) speaker also wants, through a powerful inversion, to “hide himself.” Of course, if he could really hide within her or even become her then there would still be no problem of (romantic) twosomeness, but Dawn (he imagines) bids him “go and be silent because the Day is coming now”—perhaps because his presence (so far hidden by the dark) would become clear to her, and/or because Eos is “ashamed” of the fact that she must lose the singularity she possesses, at this transient moment or “event” of the dawn (the “dawning”), once she transforms into Hemera (Day) in her journey toward the top of the sky.

Perhaps Nietzsche is seeking here the metaphysical essence of the dawn, of this natural phenomenon so beautiful and so pure and so momentary that it becomes an “abyss of light”—a shocking reversal or (down-up) inversion of the earth-abyss which is in itself the singularity that he seeks. The senses of Accident (Zufall), Chance (Ohngefähr), and Prankishness (Übermuth, “over-spirit,” playfulness) that Nietzsche correlates here with “heaven over me, pure and light,” that is, with the Dawn would need to be, in any case, interpreted in terms of both a human-cosmic (or human- cosmogonic) inversion and a human-cosmic singularity or identity. As for Chance (a term into which one may perhaps assimilate “Accident”) we think again of the momentary transience of dawn, the actual moment or event (Gefähr could suggest “event”) of night-becoming day. Thus we think of the day/night or earth/sky gap, difference, “horizon” from whose doubleness (as horizontality and verticality) Dawn now arises (differentiates herself) as pure verticality and pure singularity. If we also think of Dawn as Chance in her move out of and up from her horizontal couch where she is coupled with Tithonos, it is the singular chance of her sudden appearance at daybreak that draws to her the male speaker standing far below. Yet the singularity of the rising Dawn may also imply, as with the Aither of Hesiodic and Orphic myth, a neuter gender, whereas when embedded with Tithonos she obviously had a feminine one; perhaps it is within both her (its) neutrality and singularity that the speaker wishes to “hide himself.”

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
OhFortunae

avatar

Gender : Male Scorpio Posts : 2478
Join date : 2013-10-26
Age : 23
Location : Land of Dance and Song

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sat Feb 15, 2014 6:32 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Difference in music
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile https://plus.google.com/u/0/109705167311303906720/posts
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:51 pm

Quote :
Beauty in art is inextricably entwined with this uniqueness or
originality. Hölderlin writes, “For me, originality is intensity [Innigkeit],
depth of heart and spirit” (DKV II: 255). Thus we see why Hyperion
has to irritate us, scandalize us, with his contradictions, aberrations,
his strength and weakness, his love and wrath, his mourning. Herein
lies his intensity, his originality, the sign of all his striving and his
mortality
– herein shines his beauty. For the Beautiful shines only in
the glory of its transience. So it appears in the strivings of the hero like
Achilles: “[T]he most transient bloom in the world of heroes, ‘thus
born to live only a short time’ according to Homer, precisely because
he is so beautiful” (DKV II:510). In this way, Hölderlin transforms all
heroes into tragic heroes.

Thus the age of Philia cannot be a static, Edenic state of perfection.
Such perfection has nothing to gain or lose, no fetters to struggle
against, nothing that would move it. Rather, it is a perfection that, at
the brink of its boundary and form, sounds its own demise. This idea
can also be connected with the death and earthbound tendencies of
the gods. Mortality, then, is the very condition for love. In being-moved
and moving simultaneously, love marks and tells us of time.
Both love and time are known in passing, in the movement of the
moment: in downfall and becoming. And yes, even the gods must
reckon with this when, like Zeus, they fall for a mortal. Hölderlin will
say this much later, when, in the context of his translation of Antigone,
he speaks of Niobe’s relation to Zeus:

"She counted for the Father of Time
The sounding of the hours, the golden."

Dionysus is the ‘Guest Yet to Come’ at the celebration of Aphrodite’s
birth. He is anticipated in the crucial element, the nectar bringing
about the mixis, the “mingling” between the unlikely pair, Poros and
Penia, from which love and the world of beauty arise for mortals.
Without faithful observance of the god, Poros and Penia perpetually
encircle each other, never crossing paths under the arbor resplendent
with the promise of that golden fruit. Rather, Penury goads Resource
to use its cunning to possess the fruit in any which way it can, and
Resources’ repeated attempts create an illusion of wealth that serves
merely to disguise an ever growing abyss of poverty.


With only cunning and penury in our hearts, any love or gratitude
shrivels up altogether in that garden. And yet, as Hölderlin himself
points out, even in reflecting upon the beloved, it seems we always
come up short on love. We are beggars when we reflect. Love must
love even more if it is ever going to approximate the beauty and
transience of the beloved – or the infinite debt of gratitude owed the
beloved for giving the lover life. Thus the need for a more daring love
and gratitude, like the kind of tribute only possible when intoxicated
by the dream of the beloved. In the dream we become gods. Such a
Dionysian dream suspends the human being’s impoverished resourcefulness
so that from the divine fusion and confusion he inspires,
Resource and Poverty may be fruitful and create an erotic bind that
ushers in an authentic relation to time and the age.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sat Feb 22, 2014 6:28 pm

perpetualburn wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for that link.

More on the relation between the feminine and mobility:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:01 am

Quote :
In a previous post, I discussed the similarities between Baudelaire’s conception of the unattainable ideal in To A Passerby, and Swinburne’s narration of the Rudel story in The Triumph of Time. Yesterday, while thumbing through my copy of Fleurs du Mal, I perceived what I think to be another affinity between the two poets: a similarly contradiction-laden view of the intertwined concepts of beauty and love.

That there do exist contradictions in the very nature of these concepts is nothing new. It has been a common theme for poets through the ages. As far back as the Greek lyric age, Anacreon wrote:

I love and yet I do not love,
I am out of my mind - and I am not out of my mind. (fr46)

Most famously, perhaps, the Roman poet Catullus:

I hate and I love. Why would I do this, perhaps you ask?                                                                                                        I do not know, but I realize it happens and I am tormented. (Catullus 85)

And, of course, the troubadours:

I never held it but it holds me
all the time in its bail, Love,
and makes me glad in anger, fool in wisdom (Arnaut Daniel)

And the idea perhaps reached its apotheosis with the romantics. But what, I think, is crucial to note here is that the contradictions are, in virtually all cases, mirror images of each other (something that becomes clear on a close reading of the chiasmus in each of the lines). Furthermore, all these are examples of what Parry, in his article on Virgil, calls “the sublimation of sorrow”: that is, the so-called negative emotions that love and beauty evoke – hatred, madness, the absence of self-control, rage, foolishness – are, in a certain sense, every bit as high, pure, beautiful and noble (“sublime) as their opposites. If there is pain, then it is, in its own way, as glorious and uplifting as joy, it is, in a sense, to be as much desired as joy - and both joy and pain are two integral parts of the complete and fulfilled experience.

So far, so romantic. But the fascinating thing about Baudelaire and Swinburne is how, in their poetry, they emphatically reject this entire tradition of love-and-beauty versification, and focus upon a very different kind of contradiction. Let’s start with Baudelaire’s L’Ideal (Aggeler translation):

It will never be the beauties that vignettes show,
Those damaged products of a good-for-nothing age,
Their feet shod with high shoes, hands holding castanets,
Who can ever satisfy any heart like mine.

I leave to Gavarni, poet of chlorosis,
His prattling troop of consumptive beauties,
For I cannot find among those pale roses
A flower that is like my red ideal.

The real need of my heart, profound as an abyss,
Is you, Lady Macbeth, soul so potent in crime,
The dream of Aeschylus, born in the land of storms;

Or you, great Night, daughter of Michelangelo,
Who calmly contort, reclining in a strange pose
Your charms molded by the mouths of Titans.

This piece has the first hints of what later poems make explicit: namely that, in its entirety, beauty has an aspect that resists sublimation, that isn’t simply a reflection of pure virtues. “Profound as an abyss“, “soul so potent in crime“, “… contort, reclining in a strange pose…” – all these bear not only clear suggestions of an unabashedly carnal yearning, but also an essence that escapes a simple division into opposites (love and hate, foolishness and wisdom, and so on). And it is impossible, on reading this, especially the lines about Lady Macbeth and crime, to not be reminded of these lines from Swinburne’s Dolores:

Seven sorrows the priests give their Virgin;
But thy sins, which are seventy times seven,
Seven ages would fail thee to purge in,
And then they would haunt thee in heaven:
Fierce midnights and famishing morrows,
And the loves that complete and control
All the joys of the flesh, all the sorrows
               That wear out the soul.

In Baudelaire, this theme becomes even more explicit in Hymn to Beauty:

Do you come from Heaven or rise from the abyss,
Beauty? Your gaze, divine and infernal,
Pours out confusedly benevolence and crime,
And one may for that, compare you to wine.

You contain in your eyes the sunset and the dawn;
You scatter perfumes like a stormy night;
Your kisses are a philtre, your mouth an amphora,
Which make the hero weak and the child courageous.

Do you come from the stars or rise from the black pit?
Destiny, bewitched, follows your skirts like a dog;
You sow at random joy and disaster,
And you govern all things but answer for nothing.

You walk upon corpses which you mock, O Beauty!
Of your jewels Horror is not the least charming,
And Murder, among your dearest trinkets,
Dances amorously upon your proud belly.

The dazzled moth flies toward you, O candle!
Crepitates, flames and says: “Blessed be this flambeau!”
The panting lover bending o’er his fair one
Looks like a dying man caressing his own tomb,

Whether you come from heaven or from hell, who cares,
O Beauty! Huge, fearful, ingenuous monster!
If your regard, your smile, your foot, open for me
An Infinite I love but have not ever known?

From God or Satan, who cares? Angel or Siren,
Who cares, if you make, — fay with the velvet eyes,
Rhythm, perfume, glimmer; my one and only queen!
The world less hideous, the minutes less leaden?

There are a number of different things at work, I think, in this poem. First, notice his use of the chiasmus, as compared to the example of the lyric poets. Some of them – “joy and disaster”, “governing all things, but answering for nothing” – would not be out of place in the latter – but the rest certainly would be. “Heaven and abyss”, “divine and infernal”, “benevolence and crime”, “stars and the black pit” – none of these, I think, are the images of romanticism – quite the contrary. They suggest, again, an aspect that is the very opposite of purity and sublimity, that is almost… repulsive. That brings me to the second point – the feeling of repulsion – although not very strong just yet – is reinforced by the words he appends to describe Beauty: “horror”, “murder” and “monster” cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be sublimated in the same way that “madness” or “foolishness” or “pain” can. And this – the third point – in turn, is reinforced by his personification of Beauty – or rather, the personification of two body parts that are decidedly anti-romanticist: the “proud belly” (upon which murder is dancing “amorously”) and the foot.

There is, again, something decidedly similar in the Swinburne’s fervent declamations in Dolores:

Fruits fail and love dies and time ranges;
Thou art fed with perpetual breath,
And alive after infinite changes,
And fresh from the kisses of death;
Of languors rekindled and rallied,
Of barren delights and unclean,
Things monstrous and fruitless, a pallid
              And poisonous queen.

By the hunger of change and emotion,
By the thirst of unbearable things,
By despair, the twin-born of devotion,
By the pleasure that winces and stings,
The delight that consumes the desire,
The desire that outruns the delight,
By the cruelty deaf as a fire
              And blind as the night.

As for Baudelaire, the repulsion finally becomes unambiguous and express in this single line the final quatrain of I Adore you as much as the Nocturnal Vault:

I advance to attack, and I climb to assault,
Like a swarm of maggots after a cadaver,
And I cherish, implacable and cruel beast,
Even that coldness which makes you more beautiful.

This is a truly extraordinary image. Moths and flames is part of the standard imagery of love; but who would ever describe the pursuit as a swarm of maggots chasing after a cadaver? And that is not all: Baudelaire has a complete poem that is called, unsurprisingly, The Carcass:

My love, do you recall the object which we saw,
That fair, sweet, summer morn!
At a turn in the path a foul carcass
On a gravel strewn bed,

Its legs raised in the air, like a lustful woman,
Burning and dripping with poisons,
Displayed in a shameless, nonchalant way
Its belly, swollen with gases.

The sun shone down upon that putrescence,
As if to roast it to a turn,
And to give back a hundredfold to great Nature
The elements she had combined;

And the sky was watching that superb cadaver
Blossom like a flower.
So frightful was the stench that you believed
You’d faint away upon the grass.

The blow-flies were buzzing round that putrid belly,
From which came forth black battalions
Of maggots, which oozed out like a heavy liquid
All along those living tatters.

All this was descending and rising like a wave,
Or poured out with a crackling sound;
One would have said the body, swollen with a vague breath,
Lived by multiplication.

And this world gave forth singular music,
Like running water or the wind,
Or the grain that winnowers with a rhythmic motion
Shake in their winnowing baskets.

The forms disappeared and were no more than a dream,
A sketch that slowly falls
Upon the forgotten canvas, that the artist
Completes from memory alone.

Crouched behind the boulders, an anxious dog
Watched us with angry eye,
Waiting for the moment to take back from the carcass
The morsel he had left.

— And yet you will be like this corruption,
Like this horrible infection,
Star of my eyes, sunlight of my being,
You, my angel and my passion!

Yes! thus will you be, queen of the Graces,
After the last sacraments,
When you go beneath grass and luxuriant flowers,
To molder among the bones of the dead.

Then, O my beauty! say to the worms who will
Devour you with kisses,
That I have kept the form and the divine essence
Of my decomposed love!

I don’t think I need to say anything about this poem – it speaks for itself, far more eloquently than any critic ever could. The imagery is stark and brutal. Swinburne never goes quite this far, but he does have a stanza that is vaguely suggestive of the same idea, along with the use of the words “corpses” and “barren”:

For the crown of our life as it closes
Is darkness, the fruit thereof dust;
No thorns go as deep as a rose’s,
And love is more cruel than lust.
Time turns the old days to derision,
Our loves into corpses or wives;
And marriage and death and division
              Make barren our lives.

While highlighting the similarity between the two, I think it is also important to note that they come from very different places. Yes, both Swinburne and Baudelaire reject the romanticist conception of love as feeble, withered, incomplete, pale. But Swinburne’s poetry, as is especially evident from Hymn to Proserpine and The Last Oracle is full of anger against Christianity, which he believes has diluted and watered down real life to an unacceptable extent (“the pale god’s kingdom come“) through its emphasis on abnegnation, on a weak morality, on sinning and forgiveness, and so on. Dolores can also be read, perhaps best, as an attack on stifling Victorian morality (recall that the press in his day castigated Swinburne as “that libidinous laureate of a pack of satyrs“), and that’s why, much of the focus of Dolores is on uncontrolled and uncontrollable passion. On the other hand, one of the points that Walter Benjamin makes in his book on Baudelaire, or at least, so I gathered, is that Baudelaire was writing lyric poetry but was also, first and foremost, a poet of the city, the city and the arcades of mid-19th century Paris. This essentially is one of the causes of the seeming tension in his work, between lyric form and style and themes, and subjects and images that are entirely alien to traditional lyric poetry (the situation is somewhat similar to Byron’s Don Juan).

Nonetheless, I love to read both Swinburne and Baudelaire for precisely this reason: they fly to where other great poets fear to tread, make prey where others dare not perch, exploring the ugly and repulsive side of love and beauty to its very depths, and coming up with a very different kind of paradox: that it is precisely that ugliness and repulsiveness that is alluring, without which the experience would be, in a sense, only partial. That a decaying and putrefying corpse can nonetheless be possessed of a strange and inexplicable enchantment of its own, a kind of horrifying fascination that can’t just be rendered sterile by simply making it, like I said before, a straightforward mirror of the straightforward pleasures and joys of love and beauty that have, by now, become almost quotidian.

And lastly, the difference between Baudelaire/Swinburne and the great romantics comes out beautifully, I think, in this instance, where Baudelaire and Keats invoke precisely the same image in radically different ways. Consider:

Bright star, would I were steadfast as thou art —
Not in lone splendour hung aloft the night
And watching, with eternal lids apart,
Like Nature’s patient, sleepless Eremite,
The moving waters at their priestlike task… (Keats, Bright Star)

For Keats, the image of the star suggests steadfastness, loyalty, beauty, splendour, eternity. But Baudelaire, in one his poems (which I have, at the moment, shamefully forgotten) finds in that same image simply the suggestion that the star, hung up in isolation in the sky, will burn for all time in utter pointlessness. It is two great poets simply looking at the world in radically different ways, and perhaps, both philosophies have something to recommend themselves.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:59 pm

Just the sight of someone's face can excite us, uplift us, liberate us, depress us; the face is the very soul of a person... Plato believed beauty that touches us, is that which pulls us back from our self-oblivion, our lethe...

Whatever else that occurs is another matter, and mental dialectics..., but I believe we "connect" with some people almost involuntarily because of some kind of Re- cognition...   a re- Awareness of self.


Sloterdijk wrote:
""The elevation of the profane face to portrait-worthy status is itself a very late and precarious operation in the interfacial space, and cannot manifest itself as such in any one portrait. Portrait art, as a protracting procedure that emphasizes  or draws out individuality, is part of a comprehensive face-producing movement that, beyond all art- and image-historical manifestations, possesses genre-historical status. The possibility of facility is connected to the process of anthropogenesis itself.

It is not the portrait that enables the face to be highlighted to the point of recognizability; rather, it is protraction that elevates faces to the threshold of portray ability in an open-ended facio-genetic process. Protraction is the clearing of being in the face; it invites us to conceive of the history of being as a somatic event. The opening up of the face - even more than cerebralization and the creation of the hand - enabled people to become animals open to the world, or, more significantly, to their fellow humans.

…It is sufficient to call to mind that human faces have pulled themselves out of their animal form simply by looking at one another, so to speak, in the course of a long-term evolutionary drama.

…That means: this turning of faces towards other faces among humans became face-creating and face-opening, because the welcome qualities of faces for the eyes of the potential sexual partner inform genetic processes via selection-effective preferences. One could thus say that in a certain sense, human faces produce one another; they blossom within an oscillatory circuit of luxuriant reciprocal opening.

…To gain an idea of the affective temperatures in the horde hothouses of early history, it is sufficient to recall how, throughout our species, many adult women - as well as those men capable of paternal feelings - are still delighted by the beautiful faces of babies and infants. What requires explanation about this spontaneous inclination to adopt a charmed and friendly posture towards children's faces is not its universality, but rather its occasional absence among individuals who, through specializations of affectivity or emotional barriers are excluded from the tender microclimate that normally ensues spontaneously between adult and infant faces. …There must have been high evolutionary prizes attached over long periods to the production of facial profiles that were more delicate, more open, more delightful and more capable of joy.

…Increasing the attractiveness of humans for humans, however, is the opposite of environmental adaptation in the sense of improving fitness: it shows the early tendency of evolution towards free flower formation in the erotic-aesthetic hothouse of humanization.

…The major groups of the sapiens family are probably separated by divergent ethno-aesthetics; hence there is no guarantee that all of them would appeal sensually to all others. But al those specific and singular aspects noted in the face as character traits, or as letters and lines of regional temperaments and acquired qualities, can only enter the facial slate once this latter has been opened up, through protraction, as a clearing for physiognomic entries and fortuitous properties. The most accurate illustration of this protraction's modus operandi is the reciprocal, delicately enlivened radiance of the mother's and the child's faces in the period of postnatal bonding. Its back-and-forth motion is rooted in old tribal-historical synchronizations between the protagonists in primal-scenic games of affection; ut belongs to an ensemble of inborn schemata for careful bipersonal participation.

…The question of the face as proof of identity would not have become significant until the formations of peoples in the early classical period, he time in which human groups were exceeding their critical size for the first time and having to develop new means of cognitive orientation in an environment of mostly unrelated, unknown people. From this point on, the eyes of humans within peoples became attuned to reading faces with a view to taking family resemblances and individual character traits. The eyes of earlier humans would have lacked this combination of facial curiosity and identificatory interest entirely; their concern for the faces of the others must largely have been of a bio-aesthetic nature.

…The absence of faces from the oldest pictures only proves one thing unequivocally, however: the concern for the faces of the others belongs in an area that neither permits nor demands representation. The early interfacial perceptions are not interested in meanings and character traits, but in qualities of familiarity and cheer; they are geared towards facial light. Mothers and children do not paint each other; they beam at each other. Evolution and its heightened form in anthropological self-breeding have evidently rewarded facial formations that portray the ability to express joy. Just as the genitals are the organic creations of an inter-genital pleasure principle, human faces are the expressive forms of an interfacial joy principle. Facial magic has a clear formula: the original separation of joy. This is what made the accommodation of faces by other faces a fundamental possibility in the human field. The reference in Phaedrus to the "godlike face" contains the first attempt in philosophical thought to approach protractive facial resonance as a point of content with happiness." [Spheres]


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]



A woman ought to be the embodiment of wisdom,, just the sight of her must set you free... suffuse you with power.

Evola wrote:
"Dante goes on to say: In his arms methought I saw one sleeping, naked, save that she seemed to me wrapped lightly in a crimson drapery; whom gazing at very intently, I knew to be the lady of the salutation, who the day before had deigned to salute me. And in one of his hands methought he held a thing that was all aflame; and methought he said to me these words: Vide Cor tuum [Behold thy heart!]."
The woman's "salutation," in the literature of the Worshipers of Love, has a coded meaning based on the double meaning of the terms salutation and salvation. It is said: "Let him who merits not salvation [liberation], never hope to have her company [Beatrice's or the woman's]" (8:54). The woman who extends the salutation is the same woman who bestows salvation, or better, who propitiates a crisis and an experience that leads to salvation. Thus Dante speaks of the effects of a salutation, that often go far beyond his own strength. After all, the sight of the woman almost causes one to die. Dante says about this: "I have set my feet in that region of life beyond which one cannot go with intent to return" (14:41). And more specifically: "And whoso should endure to stay and behold her, would become a noble thing or else would die: and when she findeth one worthy to behold her, he proveth her virtue; for this befalleth him, that she giveth him salutation." [Yoga of Power]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*


Last edited by Lyssa on Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:53 am

Lyssa wrote:
I think you can only afford to possess this kind of "patient impatience" or ruthless "concern" with things that "no longer concern you", if you already have a premonition of what you desire; and that's how it makes sense, when N. writes


Jung wrote:
This fourth stage is the anticipation of the lapis. The imaginative activity of the fourth function--intuition, without which no realization is complete--is plainly evident in this anticipation of a possibility whose fulfilment could never be the object of empirical experience at all; already in Greek alchemy it was called "the stone that is no stone." Intuition gives outlook and insight; it revels in the garden of magical possibilities as if they were real. Nothing is more charged with intuitions than the lapis philosophorum. This keystone rounds off the work into an experience of the totality of the individual.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:56 pm

Quote :
European variants of this same bharaivi principle can be found in the
grim depictions of feminine divinity that haunt ancient Nordic religion. The
great modern scholar of Northern mythology, Hilda Ellis Davidson,
describes the Valkyries, or waelcyrge ,"the choosers of the slain", in a very
different light than the familiar Romantic vision of neatly coiffed, blondbraided
beauties sporting quaint helmets. Davidson paints a grim picture of
the wild-haired Valkyries haunting the gore-drenched battlefields after
combat "weaving on a ghastly loom composed of weapons, entrails and
skulls." The similarity to Kali is striking.

Lyn Webster Wilde, in her study On The Trail Of The Women
Warriors provides us with an astute description of Shakti from a feminine
point of view:

"Shakti ... evokes a sense of this power that is at once erotic, inexhaustible,
captivating, terrifying, sensual, annihilating – the divine female in action ...
it is an active power, and you can see it very clearly in the figurines of the
snake-goddesses of Crete, or the dancing Parvati statues in your local Indian
restaurant. It is not the fecund, sleepy, peaceful earth-mother energy beloved
of sentimental goddess-worshippers. It is the bright, burning, vital power of
the archetypical feminine, whether expressed in divine or human form."

Quote :
there is a vast difference between the good soldier who follows orders as a servant of the state and the left-hand path Warrior, who fights for his or her own illumination.

into-thedarkness.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/demonsoftheflesh.pdf

The most beautiful dreams of mine involve the meeting of a woman and the radiant light and burning sensation that permeates the experience.   It’s a burning yet not burning, or rather the encounter with a gentle warmth profound enough burn.  The meeting is a closing of distance between me and her.  As distance closes, I experience an intensification of heat/burning that seems internally growing (but it’s not just internal)… the whole scene is heated… The burning is simultaneously being accompanied by a transforming, highly sensual radiant (light) vision of her form.  So a double-movement of heat and changing image, where the synergy of the process seems to impress tremendous meaning (or truth) on me… It’s as if I’m witness and apart of the activity of activity.  Her form lends itself to the playfulness of light.  The feeling of the impression is so strong that nothing else seems to matter (what does philosophy matter in the presence of a woman).  It’s the feeling of being found in transformation…Not a feeling of losing yourself but gaining yourself...a feeling so strong it demands attention and vivisection but never allows itself to be emptied of its demanding nature… a feeling strong enough to die for always without hesitation, but whose living nature necessitates hesitation, care, and continuous assertion… The relationship between you and the active, charged transforming image of her(her form) goes beyond mere fantasy… it carries itself as a burning reserve of energy into waking life… It’s as if you are carrying the source and potential for transformation itself…it’s a fated feeling… it isn’t just a passing feeling… It’s a feeling whereby all fading is mercilessly fought back…the feminine as the battleground for the assertion of images…


In a way, his body becomes a template for experimentation but isn’t her form the “light” that illuminates the process of experimentation (the “torch light…to loftier paths” (in the maze of experimentation))…his form becomes amplified (he becomes radiant himself) in the playful/serious antagonism with her form(her light…or how her form re-presents light)… i.e., his form is re-worked by way of her form…And doesn’t she delight basking in the light of her creation… isn’t there so much light reaching out from the abysmal depth of his creating.   And isn’t the reaching of life expressed best in the male form of striking balance?

Not to be deprived of light even in the dark(and never to leave her deprived), he weds the moon and becomes one of her creatures of the night , always seeking darker places and finding brighter light where nothing can hide, the sun becomes the day’s fading glory… until it rises again

The masculine/feminine encounter can also be explained in the analogy of winter… It’s the middle of winter, the day after a snowstorm, sky is clear and the sun unobstructed.   Not bitterly cold, the sun provides just enough warmth.  There’s moisture in the air.  You can appreciate the cold.   Your vision is full of direct sunlight and reflected light from the snow.  The snow starts to gradually melt giving up its compact position.  There’s a transition happening within the contrasts.  It’s a break in the action (or inaction of winter), the soul’s winter oasis, but it’s only a window… winter isn’t ready to break…yet

And doesn’t the cold woman who is extremely sparing with her warmth best serve male aspirations… Life is best stimulated by distant light
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:09 pm

perpetualburn wrote:


And doesn’t the cold woman who is extremely sparing with her warmth best serve male aspirations… Life is best stimulated by distant light


You should read Serrano's Nos; I think it might interest you. If you can't get hold of a copy, let me know.

-

The sphinx is a hybrid. To hold the diverse hybridizations in a balance, of necessity, requires maintaining a very cold inert temperature - arresting of activity. Quick Heat is activity disrupting the balance, the intensity. Very slow gradual transformations.

A great consciousness is like an elephant walking slowly.... coming to consciousness slowly... till it becomes second nature. Then you have a dancer, whose gestures are enough to speak, convey everything. Communication becomes quicker. The face and the body Speaks.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:12 pm

Life is rooted in need.

That is what life is.

But that is not what life is About.

My apollo-affirmative-dionysian aesthetics say, Life is an Excess.

It Is self-preservation.
But it is About self-assertion, domination, appropriation, expansion, flourishing, overflow. Everything doesn't just want to conserve or preserve itself, it wants to expand and assert and dominate and flourish.  Life is an urge to excess, whose real-ization demands self-preservation in the process of expanding out.

Life is the will to accumulation of force; not just conservation, but maximal economy in its activity.

Excess energies or maximum WTP or seeking the path of maximum resistance - the dionysian path, invokes self-preservation.

Life itself is a possibility, an excess, that emerged from death, chaos, randomness, whatever you call it as a reaction against disorder in its innate urge to expand, to command a max. order of itself, or to organize itself effectively.

Max. self-realization is joy (i dont mean pleasure, but joy) - aggressive self-assertion seeking more and more resistances to maximize its potential. This is joy. Pleasure therefore is the dissastisfaction of the will. To be obstructed grants a resistance against which something can strive to impose itself. The sight of resistance gives pleasure.

Strength is a measure of weakness.
Pleasure is a measure of pain.
Perfection is a measure of imperfection.

Joy is holding this together. It is a capacity for a Wholesome endurance without shirking, denying anything.

Dionysian Beauty is a measure of this inter-activity it evokes in us.

Beauty is a measure of this "joy".

Which is to say, Beauty, in the dionysian perception, is the measure of how much imperfection or disorder an entity can endure without collapsing the boundaries between perfection and imperfection, and yet, holding them together. Duration of maximal stress.
In the example I always use, its like a dividing line in between two pages of a book,,, holding-together-yet-holding-them-apart....  similar to a bride metaphor linking two things together, yet simultaneously distancing them apart.

The dionysian is the will to unity and transfiguration...., while the apollo is the will to boundary and definitiveness.

When I look at a beautiful entity, I derive "joy" [not pleasure], in the degree, this beautiful entity manages to pull everything together as a whole... inter-linking everything.

In the Heideggerian example, a river is beautiful for pulling around it a whole ecological net-work of sun, trees, temples, people, occupations... it bestows a "world"... or unconceals it or better, brings together. A gathering.
Beauty is the Holy.

Heidegger wrote:
"It is the temple-work that first joins together and simultaneously gathers around itself the unity of those paths and relations in which birth and death, disaster and blessing, victory and disgrace, endurance and decline obtain the form of destiny for human being. …The temple first gives to things their look and to humanity their outlook on themselves. [PLT 42–3/GA5 27–9]


How many things can it interlace and pull toward it?

Beauty con-centr-ates, and trans-figures.

It is a measure of the trans-formation it can evoke from us. [not just in us].
A man trans-figured by a beautiful object trans-figures the world in turn.
Beauty is a measure of this power, the extent of transfiguration it can affect from us.
A degree of a self-differentiating power.
That is, when I transfigure the world from my fullness, I have differentiated mySelf from the world I was in before.
I have differentiated mySelf like a cell differentiates itself into an organ and then an organism.
Beauty is a degree of how much of this self-differentiating power it evokes from us.

It brings the world together, collapsing it, and gives us a grasp - not on it, but that infinity. We sense this possibility to real-ize that, as liberating.
The horizons or the heights we can scale when that infinity is scaled down for us in that beautiful entity.

Max. resistance tempting [tempt/attempt/experiment] us to impose ourselves on that infinity.

What separates one rose from another rose, for example, involves Apollonian definitions, an eye for order, symmetry, proportion and whatever exhibits this to the max.

But is a rose a beautiful entity? Is a dog? Is a constellation?

Is Napoleon more beautiful than Tom and Harry, although Napoleon, Tom, and Harry all may have their own innate inviobility, innate dignity?

This is not relativistic or subjective, but an objective Dionysian question of a power expression.

Beauty in this sense is measured by the degree of inter-activity.
How much world does it pull and so trans-figure us and in turn how much does it compel us to trans-figure the world in our image is an ex-press-ion of our power to self-differentiate more and more.

It is a measure of our "joy".

Our "joy" is max. self-assertion.


This relates to something else.


There are always going to be people held in high esteem from the past whose shadow will loom on us.

Like gods and goddesses they tower as great standards in some things.

Its easy to dismiss these figures as 'non-existent', 'the question doesn't even arise', 'they were nothing', 'shrug', etc. are all easy responses,,, and the one who is indifferent to this past, taking no note of it at all, such indifference would strike many as far more attractive, than one looking back at the past.

Indifference can be a sign of strength, but can also conceal a weakness.
As I was reading somewhere, today our travels to past heritage sites are nothing more than us being mere flaneurs, mere tourists, who reminisce and buy a souvenir for memory, and instant photos circulated "I too was there"...
What does that mean?
What have all these travellers to old ruins and heritage sites become?


The degree to which we can acknowledge the past, to me, is a measure of self-love, although such ones may get falsely tagged as "insecure" for engaging in it.
But all value judgements are comparisons and the past is where the highest order is.
A lover Loves his/her way out of things, not turn a blind eye.

The more I look to the past and what was achieved, the more I realize the lag I represent.
What a caricature I am of some things, of some people who have weathered time.
Those who are our heroes, our heroines, those characters...

They give me heartburns, like increased consciousness always does. But I am nothing short of grateful for this knowledge of their existence.

Can we surpass a homer, a caesar?

Nevermind people. But this age.

How many still want the old times and the homeric age to return back?

How many still want the old heroes to return back?

The times we live in look shabby compared to the golden past.


And the more we attempt to bridge that lag, the more ridiculous we look perhaps.

How many women disappointed by men who can't measure up to the ideal heroes gone by?
How many men disappointed by women who can't be even a pinch of inspiration?

And yet, where would we be, if a Hitler found himself to be a dwarf compared to Caesar?

Where would we be, if a N. found himself to be a dwarf compared to a Socrates?

Quote :
"We are more than the individuals: we are the whole chain as well, with the tasks of all the futures of that chain." [N., WTP, 687]
Quote :
"The rights a man arrogates to himself are related to the duties he imposes upon himself, to the tasks to which he feels equal. The great majority of men have no right to existence, but are a misfortune to higher men." [N., WTP, 872]

Our sense of self-love is a direct reflection of the tasks we Choose and are Compelled by to take up on ourselves.
A force of pride that drives us.

Not everyone of us may outdo the shadow that a Hitler or a N. could, but it is in the trying, no matter the caricatures we are, that we may just set up a standard, a height, a task to confer to the future.
And if not a height, but a will-to-height, that tempts them to take it as their task. Atleast thereby we bequeath, a pride in this willingness to height atleast.


Although I feel this pressure as a woman, I realize it weighs on a man more.

A man "has to" show his worth. He has to take on the past, in the middle of making a living.
He is engulfed by a hundred mundane anxieties, that require him to wear pants. That require him to civilize himself. That require him to go down to the "market-place".

Satyr joked somewhere, "I have to wear pants now."

Satyr has written many beautiful essays, timeless lines, but of all that he's expressed, the above stands out for me.

Taken out of its particular context, I found it poignant somehow.

To another, no doubt, it might appear corny, or comical, or just rubbish, but to me it sums up a human's, esp. a man's existential plight in that most non-chalant lighthearted way Satyr does it with ease.
If there are any good writers on this forum, Satyr included,, they should make note of this line as a great title for what could be a wonderful existential book.
Woody Allen or Derrida would grab such a line...  they would understand. No one better than them, their eyes trained to pick up the bleak and the humour and the agony together from just about anywhere and in any form. They feed on it;

Quote :
"In Woody Allen’s Annie Hall (1977), the character Alvy Singer says to his girlfriend Annie, “I feel that life is divided into the horrible and the miserable. That's the two categories. The horrible are like, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. And the miserable is everyone else. So you should be thankful that you're miserable, because that's very lucky, to be miserable.” This is one of the most quotably funny bits in Allen’s movie, which was originally titled “Anhedonia,” the psychopathology that places Alvy among the miserable. Clinically, anhedonia is the inability to experience pleasure." [Ligotti, conspiracy]
They would understand the poignancy in that line.

How much freedom can a man find, how much height can he manage to set, how much pride can he afford to let lose on this world?

How much?

So on the subjective note, I wish to say, I find beauty in what is imperfect, what is incomplete striving to become perfect... more than the end product itself.
The striving spirit, so frail and yet strong also, under the shadow of the past fighting dragons, is so moving, and a work of art in itself, than a complete piece, looking 'perfect' by the strict definitions we give.

Quote :
"The effectiveness of the incomplete. - Just as figures in relief produce so strong an impression on the imagination because they are as it were on the point of stepping out of the wall but have suddenly been brought to a halt, so the relief-like, incomplete presentation of an idea, of a whole philosophy, is sometimes more effective than its exhaustive realization: more is left for the beholder to do, he is impelled to continue working on that which appears before him so strongly etched in light and shadow, to think it through to the end, and to overcome even that constraint which has hitherto prevented it from stepping forth fully formed." [HATH, 178]

Pygmalion.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Dead ends, the unfinished, the incomplete, the imperfect is what he chooses to work on and bring to life.

I find pride in wanting to take the most hopeless and unpromising, and breathing life into it; its an artist's pride to give his shape to a dead end.

There are many ideals and dreams that are such dead-ends.

A dionysian aesthetic would have us not throw away the useless, but to give it purpose, form, meaning, as a question-mark at our own power.
Its not enough to be erect, there should be a pride to erect what is lying down.

Psyche - a word originally meaning "breath" came to designate the soul.

To breathe your soul into another, a dead end, a dead ideal, a dead dream is to give life, and to give life is to be God.

If there is a laughter that laughs at such a man, I don't know it, because man Is god to me.
I live in a world where many such Gods have existed, and continue to exist in our midst.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*


Last edited by Lyssa on Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:16 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Apr 02, 2014 5:50 pm

Lyssa wrote:


Pygmalion.

Dead ends, the unfinished, the incomplete, the imperfect is what he chooses to work on and bring to life.

I find pride in wanting to take the most hopeless and unpromising, and breathing life into it; its an artist's pride to give his shape to a dead end.

There are many ideals and dreams that are such dead-ends.

A dionysian aesthetic would have us not throw away the useless, but to give it purpose, form, meaning, as a question-mark at our own power.
Its not enough to be erect, there should be a pride to erect what is lying down.

Psyche - a word originally meaning "breath" came to designate the soul.

To breathe your soul into another, a dead end, a dead ideal, a dead dream is to give life, and to give life is to be God.

If there is a laughter that laughs at such a man, I don't know it, because man Is god to me.
I live in a world where many such Gods have existed, and continue to exist in our midst.



Quote :
"Probably the greatest oversight of many historians of Greek art is to forget the fact that most of what we call Freek 'works' of art' were fashioned for dedication ex vote. Once in museums, and detached from their original dedicatory inscriptions, these votive objects are too easily absorbed into an art history that stresses the skills of those who made them, while ignoring the pieties of those who commissioned them. It is true that public credit may have attached to certain votive gifts on the grounds that they were made by the most highly regarded artists of the day. To achieve votive memorial with maximum artistic akribeia, or finesse, may have been as valuable as having it executed in solid gold.

'Some of the gods whom we honor we see clearly, but of others we set up statues as images, and we believe that when we worship these, lifeless [apsychous] though they be, the living gods [empscyhous theos] beyond feel great goodwill towards us and gratitude.' Plato thus struggled to account for the image-making machinery of Greek cults…
Most Greek worshippers must have preferred to accept what their own language implied: that a statue served as the 'seat' or hedos of a deity, and the temple it stood in could properly be regarded as the god's home or oikos…

They were also regarded as having prophylactic powers.
Greek art and literature are packed with examples of such credence. Cassandra clutching at a statue after the fall of Troy (ill.22) is a common vignette on Greek vases, and Aeschylus, in his Sven Against Thebes, dramatices the effort made by the Theban women to save their city from a siege by appealing to the 'regiment' (strateuma) of the city's statues (archaia brete).

When a mythographer records that Daedalus was the 'first to represent the gods', he charts not only a pioneering artistic ambition, but also the means for an artist to gain public veneration. The artist displayed skill, techie, by his representation of the divine; he also thus demonstrated a semi-divine status, since to be able to represent the gods he must also have seen them, if only in his mind's eye. Hence the near-magical attributes in literary anecdotes concocted around Greek artists, which would later pervade the Renaissance hagiographies of Giotto, Michelangelo et al.: the artist was a vehicle for divine communication, therefore a 'divine maker' (deus artifex).

In modern parlance it is still possible (though mannered) to exclaim, 'How divine!' in front of a work of art. In ancient Greek usage, to declare a sculpture 'godly' (entheos) was not a simply aesthetic response, but an article of faith. And this is how Greek sculpture was invested with its ennobling qualities. The viewers of divine or heroized forms believed that their sculptors had done more than provide souvenirs of greatness. A spirit, an animated power, had been caught in the stone, clay or bronze.
This spirit - be it of a deity, a Homeric warrior, a deceased priestess or a prematurely lost infant - reserved a message for all who gazed on its sculpted form. Thus Greeks cukptures served a genuinely vicarious function.

To those who are culturally unfamiliar with it, the sight of a collection of Greek sculpture can be a shock, and that must also have been the case in antiquity. Some non-Greeks - Jews and Christians especially - abhorred its idolatrous significance; others - certainly the Etruscans and perhaps, too, the Buddhist peoples of Gandhara, in northwest India - altered their own traditions of image-making as a result of it; and of course, one or two greeks - notably plato - remained suspicious of the illusionistic obsessions endemic among the sculptors of their day.
To Muslims, Jews and some Christians, the worship of graven images is an abomination. To the greeks, the absence of graven images in religious practice was equally repugnant, or at best curious. Herodotus, a tolerant observer, noted that the persians conducted their cults in an open landscape, worshipping without the paraphernalia of altars, statuary or temples: they do so, he suggests, because 'they do not believe the gods to share the same nature with men, as we Greeks imagine' (Histories I.131).

Later writers went further than Herodotus, and condemned iconoclastic cultures as uncivilized. It took sophistication, according to this argument, for the gods to be figured; and as a second-century AD philosopher would put it, 'the greek manner of honoring the gods recruits whatever is most beautiful on earth [en he toys kallistois], whether in terms of raw materials [kathara], human shape [morphe de anthropine] or artistic precisen [techne de akribei]' (Maximus of Tyre, Orations II.3).
The most interesting clause of this statement by Maximum concerns humans shape. The best human bodies, he is saying, are vehicles of the divine. Such is the basis of ancient Greek anthropomorphism.
Tracing the ripples created around the world by 'the greek Revolution' is a study in itself." [Nigel Spivey, Understanding Greek Sculpture]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Fri May 09, 2014 6:45 pm

More Orpheus:

Quote :
The most famous classical example of the speaking head is in the story of Orpheus, referred to earlier, and a comparison of the figure of this pagan poet with St Denis indicates that his relation to the Christian saint is more extensive than the single theme of decollation.  Orpheus’ murder and dismemberment occurs after his descent to the underworld, his loss of Euridice through lack of faith, and his subsequent founding of the Eleusian mysteries based on his experiences in the otherworld.  Indeed it was in vengeance for having excluded women from the celebration of these mysteries that the women of Thrace, members of the Dionysian cult called Maenads, assassinated the patron of music.  Everything about Orpheus identifies him with the mystical, and it is precisely because of his own passing into the otherworld that Orpheus is able to bring back to earth the secret understanding that he then begins to teach: “It is on the basis of this myth that Orphic theology is constructed.  From his descent into the Underworld in search of Eurydice, Orpheus is supposed to have brought back the knowledge of how to get to paradise and to eschew all of the obstacles and traps that await the soul on this journey after death.”

It is this suprahuman knowledge that the disembodied head of Orpheus expresses as an oracle at Lesbos in a discourse so far beyond the mundane that its author is honoured by poets as the inventor of their art.  The understanding possessed by Orpheus is gained through transmissions associated with death, as reflected in his descent into the land of the dead in search of Eurydice.  He speaks “from the other side,” as it were, and the disembodied head signifies at one and the same time the world of the living – in that it speaks – and the world of the dead – in that it is lifeless.  Thus the severed head becomes a medium through which the otherworld communicates to this world and through which its special language is translated into the discursive language of humankind.

Credit for the inauguration of the Eleusian mysteries – rituals which, we might note, address death and the afterlife – Orpheus shares with the god Dionysus.  The relationship of the two is one of identity through opposition.  Orpheus refuses to honour Dionysus and, in opposition to the Dionysian cult, preaches the serene, ordered rational, “Apollionian way.”  This opposition, some say, caused the jealous god to inspire the Maenads to tear Orpheus to pieces.  The narrative itself is an encodement that uses the story of enmity between a man and a god to veil the theophany of that god through coincidentia oppositorum.  Proclus breaks through this code, as Robert Graves explains:  “Thus Orpheus did not come in conflict with the cult of Dionysus; he was Dionysus, and he played the rude alder-pipe, not the civilized lyre.  Thus Proclus (Commentary on Plato’s Politics: p.398) writes:  ‘Orpheus, because he was the principal in the Dionysian rites, is said to have suffered the same fate as the god,’ and Apollodorus (i.3.2) credits him with having invented the Mysteries of Dionysus."

Just as Orpheus may be seen as the man “twice perishing,” so Dionysus is known as the god “twice born,” having been torn from his mother’s womb at six months, having been planted in Zeus’ thigh and having been “born” again three months later.  The story of Orpheus’ descent to death to rescue his wife is a version of the story of Dionysus’ descent into Hell to bring his mother back to life.  Dionysus and Orpheus are the principal figures representing mystical ecstasy in both the initial approach to that ecstasy through calm reason the eventual attainment of it in orgiastic derangement of reason.  Thus Dionysus bears the title “god of the vine” and is credited with the invention of win and the euphoria of its intoxication – the divine unreason that loosens the tongue and makes possible the ethereal discourse of poetry, Orpheus’ art.

Quote :
In addition to the nominal similarity of the Christian mystic and the pagan god of divine mysteries, the mediaeval authors would likely have been encouraged by the feature of Orpheus’ speaking head to see in the myths a parallel to the story of St Denis of Paris who, of course, was thought to have been the Areopagite.  Orpheus’ death is brought about for a particular reason and in a particular manner, symbolically expressed; his propagation of the rational, orderly process of understanding provokes the opposite procedure of the dismantling, undoing, and negating all of the assertions brought about through similitude and relation.  This procedure is figured in the Maenadian frenzy that dismembers Orpheus, unconstructing, as it were, piece by piece, the physical structure of the body and negating, part by part, the architectural whole that signifies being and form: except the head!

Orpheus’ head, like St Denis’ and those of all the many other cephalophores, remains in the world of human construction, producing a discourse unlike any other, as a token of the reality perceived only though the transcendence of human discourse.  While Orpheus’ head, placed in a cave sacred to Apollo, speaks for that god as oracle, St Denis’ head, carried to a sacred place by the saint himself, expresses nothing informative at all, but only sings repetitively ritual praises of God and, through such divine pleo-nasm, functions likewise as divine spokesman.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:53 pm

Lyssa wrote:


Lyssa wrote:


Quote :
"They wish to "cultivate" her in general still more, and intend, as they say, to make the "weaker sex" STRONG by culture: as if history did not teach in the most emphatic manner that the "cultivating" of mankind and his weakening--that is to say, the weakening, dissipating, and languishing of his FORCE OF WILL--have always kept pace with one another, and that the most powerful and influential women in the world (and lastly, the mother of Napoleon) had just to thank their force of will--and not their schoolmasters--for their power and ascendancy over men. That which inspires respect in woman, and often enough fear also, is her NATURE, which is more "natural" than that of man, her genuine, carnivora-like, cunning flexibility, her tiger-claws beneath the glove, her NAIVETE in egoism, her untrainableness and innate wildness, the incomprehensibleness, extent, and deviation of her desires and virtues.
That which, in spite of fear, excites one's sympathy for the dangerous and beautiful cat, "woman," is that she seems more afflicted, more vulnerable, more necessitous of love, and more condemned to disillusionment than any other creature. Fear and sympathy it is with these feelings that man has hitherto stood in the presence of woman, always with one foot already in tragedy, which rends while it delights--What? And all that is now to be at an end? And the DISENCHANTMENT of woman is in progress? The tediousness of woman is slowly evolving? Oh Europe! Europe! We know the horned animal which was always most attractive to thee, from which danger is ever again threatening thee! Thy old fable might once more become "history"--an immense stupidity might once again overmaster thee and carry thee away! And no God concealed beneath it--no! only an "idea," a "modern idea"!" [BGE, 239]

You could also compare her [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] nature to your earlier comment,

Perpetual wrote:
The male form arouses the feeling of temperance itself. It's more concrete, angular and statuesque in appearance. A woman's form seems more deceptive, necessarily, and arouses the most extreme emotions. Everything about a woman's form is meant to draw you in and spit you back out. It can be both the most intoxicating and most abject thing. A man's form is more reflective. A man's form build's to a peak and this is part of its beauty (short-lived as it may be). It would seem nihilistic to divorce philosophy from a love of physical beauty considering European beauty runs side by side with it.





The Feminine Carnivore...


Quote :
"Her body is a vessel of death. Her beauty is a lure. Her charm a trap. She is irresistible. Her voice is deceit. Her word a plot. Her gesture a snare. She plans her seduction. She cannot help herself. Her mind is a theater of seduction. She is incapable of other thought. Her body was made for seduction. For her all other thought is a mask, a guise for her single purpose. Her skill is ultimate. She will stop at nothing. Underneath grace, she is grasping; beneath her singing is a siren. Her mouth sucks. The air around her becomes a whirlpool. She is treacher­ ous. Closeness with her is drowning, intimacy suffocation. She blinds.

The innocent cannot see her real shape. Behind her suppliant flesh is a maw, a devouring hole, an abyss. Death. Destruction. Darkness without light. Nothingness. She will eat the flesh she appears to love. Her hunger is never satisfied. To yield to her one demand is to yield to endless demanding. In her is a depth so profound, she darkens all light. The voyager never finds his way out. She is an infinite ocean. Inside her body is hell. Burning.

When she is angry all life stands still in terror. At the gate of her womb is a wound which bleeds freely. It is a wound that will never heal. She is mutilated. She is damaged. She will never forgive existence for this. Her every act is an act of mutilation, of distortion. She is a plague. A disease. The blood from her wound will sour milk. It will spoil fruit or the fermentation in wine; it will break the strings of a violin; it will poison food; cause disease, death in battle, impotence and shrinking. The color of her blood is the color of calamity, of fire, of evil. The smell is offensive,
the smell is a warning. She loves blood. She asks for slaughter. She asks for sacrifice. Her sinister wish is for castration. For more wounding, for endless mutilation. Her vulva has teeth. Her stare can petrify. Her womb is a grave. She cannot help herself. She devours even herself. Her passion is endless, without reason, without boundary, existing only for itself, careless, arrogant, lavish, indulgent, mindless, inexorable, cruel, selfish, she will not stop of her own will; her body will not stop being; if she were set free, to do as she willed, her body would never stop, all being would be destroyed except her being, which at last her hunger would not spare, she would consume herself; in her body is the seed of nothingness." [Griffin, Woman and Nature]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:16 am

Quote :
Male Knowledge and the Descent Myth

"It was possible to create these "descent groups" because agnation was cultic rather than physiological. Sacrificing, not birth or begetting, maintained agnatic continuity .... Physical paternity was not entirely irrelevant: an adulterous woman, a terrible threat to agnatic purity, was excluded from sacrifices of every kind, under threat of terrible punishment from any and every hand. (Jay 1992:45)"

Orpheus is a powerful and enduring mythological figure precisely because he is so inextricably caught up in this new negotiation of radically dichotomous categories-soul and body, life and death, Apollo and Dionysos, male and female. He is called a priest and the initiator of "the Orphic brotherhoods," priests of the sect that L. R. Farnell calls "perhaps the strongest religious influence in the Hellenic world" (1912: 137-39). And what does a priest do? He sacrifices. Here I call upon the work of the late feminist anthropologist Nancy Jay:

"Sacrifice joins people together in community, and, conversely, it separates them from defilement, disease, and other dangers. This opposition of joining and separating is so widespread that one of the clearest indications that a ritual killing is properly sacrifice is that it is part of a religious system of this kind. (1992:17, emphasis added)"

Orpheus is remembered as the archetypal poet-musician, but he is also a sacrificer. As Jay's remarkable book amply demonstrates, "It is a common feature of unrelated traditions that only adult males-fathers, real and metaphorical-may perform sacrifice" (xxiii). Guthrie, citing Apollonius Rhodius, Diodoros, and other ancient writers, enumerates the instances in which the Thracian bard, the putative father of a priestly lineage, acts in this capacity for the crew of the Argo:

"[In the Orphic version of the Argonaurica] we find him performing the inaugural sacrifice before the start, persuading the Argonauts to become initiated at Samothrace ... sacrificing after the accidental killing of King Kyzikos, performing the purificatory rites at Malea on the return journey ... and finally, his last act before returning to his home in Thrace, staying behind alone to offer sacrifice at Tainaron (believed to be one of the entrances to Hades) to the rulers of the world below. (1993 [1935]:28)"

In short, Orpheus' pre-descent legends are characterized by sacrifice, literally from beginning to end. And at the end, he performs his priestly function alone at the very Tainarian Gate which will close upon him forever after his famous-if failed-adventure in Persephone's realm, undertaken in the guise of a bereft lover. I submit that it was upon this very threshold, the one that separates the living from the dead, that another revolutionary concept-now soteriological rather than eschatological-came to be expressed in the mythic narrative of Orpheus' descent for EurydikC."


Quote :
Who Pays the Penalty?

"Probably Orpheus himself was the hero of the Orphic poem on the Descent into Hades, but it is very difficult to find a connexion between the myth and Orphic belief. (Nilsson 1935:212)"

EurydikC is not so named when we first encounter the story of Orpheus' bride. She is instead called Agriope, "Wild-Eyed" or "Wild-Voiced (Nilsson 1935:30).
However appropriate the name for a Thracian nymph in the wild retinue of Dionysos, it stands in diametrical contrast to Orpheus himself, who through music and Muse-inspired poetry tames and civilizes what is wild. He knows that the wild (Adikia, Disorder) must be brought under control, made human, useful. One of the most outstanding and time tested ways to bring the uncontrollable under control is by means of sacrifice. Control, by definition, requires the eradication of wildness, or at least its transformation into Order (DikC). Through sacrifice, wildness is expunged, but so too is the Being who embodies it. "The victim has indeed been brought under a kind of analytic control, but in the process it has been killed" (Jay 1992:xxvi).

Classics scholars and poets, as well as comparative mythologists and other folklorists, have made a virtual industry of guessing at why Orpheus disobeys the injunction not to turn, not to look back. But his function as a sacrificer has never been brought to bear on the issue. What if the killing of Agriope, literally accomplished in the eyes of a priest, is the act that transforms wildness (adikia) into justice (dikd)? What if, at the moment before Orpheus acts on Persephone's tearful good will and robs her of the penalty that all men must pay, he stops at the threshold, frozen in the insight that he might pay the penalty of ancient guilt not with his own life on earth as was always demanded before his own religious doctrine delayed the requisite payment until after death, but with the life of another? And that with his turning to sacrifice Eurydikt, whose name means "Wide Justice," he could thereby win redemption for all those sacrificers (fathers and sons) who would come after him?

There are two kinds of humans: those who pay the penalty of the ancient grief and those who do not. The first group is comprised of beings eligible for immortality and bliss; the second will spend eternity in the dark recesses of the Underworld, never to be raised again into the sun, never to be heroized by men. Additionally, there are two kinds of humans: males and females.
And only males are in a position to pay the penalty (dikC) because they are the only variety of human to whom initiation in the rites of atonement are available. But with what might the penalty be paid? Why not with something of essential, but profoundly ambiguous, value: Being-in-Time personified, that is, the body of a woman. With DikC, or better yet, with EurydikC, "Wide Justice," All Justice once and for all, all the justice and atonement that Persephone could ever demand from men. Given that her "body" is already that of a bloodless wraith (and hence would not implicate the forbidden practice of blood sacrifice) why not administer to it the sacrificial look that kills?

Bewailing the loss of Bion (a bard in the lineage of Orpheus), the inheritor of his musical prowess, Moschus, identifies Orpheus' wife for the first time as EurydikC (Lang 1932 [ 18801 : 169). The section of the poem that carries her new name begins: "But justice hath overtaken them all."

It goes on: "Not unrewarded will the singing be; and as once to Orpheus's sweet minstrelsy she gave Eurydice to return with him, even so will she send thee too, Bion, to the hills". Persephone will send Bion, as she did Orpheus after his death at the hands of the Maenads, to the hills, otherwise known as the Isles of the Blessed. He takes EurydikC with him only in the sense that now all men take her with them when they die-as ransom. As it was later understood in the cases of Jesus and Custer, the sacrifice of the one came to be understood as redemption, as payment of the penalty for the many.

Is this why Orpheus is dismembered by the female followers of the original One, the god Dionysos? Is Orpheus' payment-by-proxy understood by the Maenads as the ultimate betrayal of the pact made with Persephone by Orpheus himself in his own doctrine of atonement to the Queen of Death, Phanes-Kore herself, the mother of Zagreus-Dionysos? Did he carry the valuation of the male over the female, Timelessness over Being-in-Time, one step too far? Did his innovative act of sacrificial justice change forever the concept of death and redemption for the generations of humans to follow?

Now, long after all the Orphic poets who knew the secret rites of initiation have gained immortality in the Western Lands, subsequent Western religious consciousness seems to have passed its own judgment on this trick played by human men against the gods: it accepted it wholeheartedly as correct. It adopted this essential function of sacrificial mythology into its living religion. All of this means to suggest that EurydikC may hold a more important place in the history of religious thought than was previously suspected. Rather than merely biding her time as a sign-woman (a female whose role is always to signify something beyond herself) in Hades, she may have eventually been replaced with another, more enduring sign, that of a male redeemer; the Styx with another, a brighter river; the Isles of the Blessed with a new home for those who can sustain the judgment of death, that is, the redeemed, the conquerors of Being-in-Time, the cosmic enemy without which no redemption is possible, or indeed, required.

Allow for a moment the possibility that the best of all possible worlds, for all varieties of human Being, is not a world without women-without whom Being-in-Time is unthinkable and unknowable-think of EurydikC, and in the spirit of the eighteenth century American hymn "Free Grace," sing:

"Hallelujah to the man who purchased our pardon.
We'll praise him again when we pass over Jordan."

Cosmological myths are not without consequences. Ask a woman."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:39 am

Woman is at ease being touched by the hand that is at ease touching - the woman feels the accuracy of the hand shaping her form, posture, movement, being - she revels in being made to see from all angles at once - her whole being is oriented on being made to spin and be viewed, her life is one great theatre play -- the center of the stage, as she still is among those living amidst remnants of ancient cultures. Men flutter around her like children. And yet, the boys are away, driving, digging, destroying, designing - where manhood is incomplete, woman becomes her own hell. Where man doesn't carry the weight of his lust in the open, woman must carry the whole load. Woman never shirks back - this is why she is considered lowest. "the dark mother" is she who gives birth even to the unfortunate. The bitter sea.

Some girls are chosen. All envy and prowess is her share, she dances amidst the hatred and the failure, and she beckons him who risks his well being for her, and depending on his charm, she will prove to the world that it isn't as wretched as it sometimes would like to be.
Back to top Go down
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:54 am

Quote :
I add only that it is worth asking why experience of the underworld turned Orpheus into a devotee of the sun. The answer is, I think, provided by the amazing light that frequently marks the unforgettable transition from anxiety to joy for the mystic initiand, as it does also in the modern near-death experience. This light was, in mystery-cult, sometimes envisaged as the sun (cf., e.g., Aristophanes Frogs 155, 454-5). Mystery-cult was a rite of passage that had to be kept secret from the world at large: it often involved the imagined death of the initiate as a rehearsal for real death, as well as transition from ignorance to knowledge and from anxiety to joy. At Bacchae 629-30, in a passage full of correspondences with mystic initiation, Dionysus makes a “light” (this is the word in the manuscript, which scholars have mistakenly altered) which Pentheus attacks – an extreme expression of the individualistic obstinacy of his resistantance to mystery-cult. And Sophocles, perhaps influenced by Aeschylus, made Lycurgus “put…out the fire” (Antigone 964). Orpheus is in myth associated with both Dionysus and Apollo. His choice of the sun (Apollo) implies the superiority to the mystic light of Dionysus.
- "A Companion to Tragedy - Rebecca Bushnell"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jul 20, 2014 6:46 pm

Apollo's Light:

Quote :
"Alternations between light and darkness, sky and earth, reassert themselves in literary portrayals of Apollo. John Gould points out that in the Iliad Apollo is shown as giving “hints of a darker, altogether more uncanny aspect of divinity than that seen in the divine assemblies of Olympus.” In Book One, for example, Apollo “comes like the night” to punish the Greeks for Agamemnon’s insult to Chryses, the devoted priest of Apollo (44-47):

"Down from the peaks of Olympus he strode, wroth at heart,
bearing on his shoulders his bow and covered quiver. The
arrows rattled on the shoulders of the angry god, as he
moved; and his coming was like the night."

“Even further from the image of socialized humanity,” Gould continues, “is the unseen Apollo who begins (the sacrificial image is almost inevitable) the slaughter of Patroclus in Iliad 16.” In lines 787-796, Patroclus is attacked by Apollo, who strikes him in the back, stunning him; the god then knocks his helmet off, leaving Patroclus with neither sense nor means of defense. Patroclus has been touched by Apollo and is now doomed; with tragic irony, it is just as Patroclus is attacking the Greeks “like a god” that Apollo intervenes, and the end of the hero’s life is “shown forth” (787).

Despite Homer’s words in Iliad 1 comparing the advent of Apollo to the onset of darkness, it is the god’s connection with light and the sun which has seemed to predominate, especially as a result of 19th-century German scholarship. We must be cautious not to give undue emphasis to the alleged link between Apollo and the sun. Bremmer points out that this association originated with “an intellectual, sun-venerating sect in the fifth century BC. It had little influence, except that Roman poets found the name Phoebus a convenient synonym for Sol.” As Carlier observes, the linking of Apollo and the Sun does not occur in surviving texts before Aeschylus. Moreover, “the myths often pit him against nocturnal and chthonic forces: against Gaia, mistress of nocturnal Dreams, in Iphigenia in Tauris, and especially against the Erinyes (Furies), those daughters of Night, in Aeschylus’ Oresteia.” The Python which Apollo kills at Delphi is a snaky, earthy creature, as is the earth-born giant Tityos whom he defeats. Apollo has sons who are, as Carlier points out, “similar to himself, such as Aristaeus, physician-purifier and killer of serpents, but also children who are very different from him: Asclepius and Trophonius, hero serpents, soothsayers marked by their complicity with the earth and its mantic powers.” These chthonic associations, especially when seen alongside of the god’s close links to homicide and appeasement of the furious dead, form “a dark side to the luminous and celestial Apollo.” Carlier points out that the fire of Apollo is neither the flame of the artisan nor the “peaceful and supernatural light” associated with him by philosophers; rather, Apollo’s fire is blazing, violent and frightening:

"Then, like a star at noonday, the lord, far-working Apollo, leaped from the ship: flashes of fire flew from him thick and their brightness reached to heaven. He entered into his shrine between priceless tripods, and there made a flame to flare up bright, showing forth the splendor of his shafts, so that the radiance filled all Crisa, and the wives and well-girded daughters of the Crisaeans raised a cry at that outburst of Phoebus; for he cast great fear upon them all. (Homeric Hymn to Apollo 440-447)"

Carlier sees in this passage “blast, immediacy, possession, terror, cry.” Apollonian light, she concludes, “has been described since the Homeric Hymns in terms that evoke the violent nature of the bow——the bow being the characteristic weapon of the god, which gains him access to Olympus.”

Quote :
“The song of the most alert of all gods does not arise dreamlike out of an intoxicated soul,” Otto concludes, “but flies directly towards a clearly seen goal, the truth and the rightness of its aim is a sign of its divinity. Out of Apollo’s music there resounds divine recognition. . . . This music is thus the great educator, the source and symbol of all order in the world and in the life of mankind. Apollo the musician is identical with the founder of ordinances, identical with him, who knows what is right, what is necessary, what is to be.” This clarity of vision, this unerring perception, Otto claims, is only possible with distance: “Apollo rejects whatever is too near——entanglement in things, the melting gaze, and, equally, soulful merging, mystical inebriation and its ecstatic vision.”

-

Quote :
"Apollonius of Rhodes, in Argonautica 2.680ff., describes a glimpse of Apollo granted at dawn to the Argonauts as the god moved away to the remote land of the Hyperboreans:

"They were awe-struck at the sight and no one dared to face the god and meet his lovely eyes. They stood there with selfbowed heads while he, aloof, passed through the air on his way across the sea."

The god makes no direct contact with the adventurers, and certainly offers them no intimate, personal assistance such as that granted to Odysseus by Athena in the Odyssey. Apollo, Carlier concludes, was for the Greeks distant, formidable, and a readily-available symbol of divine transcendence."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

-


Paul Silentiary wrote:
"We ask no flowers to crown the blushing- rose,
Nor glittering gems, thy beauteous form to deck ;
The pearl, in Persia's precious gulf that grows,
Yields to the dazzling whiteness of thy neck :
Gold adds not to the lustre of thy hair,
But, vanquish 'd, sheds a fainter lustre there.
The Indian hyacinth's celestial hue
Shrinks from the bright effulgence of thine eye ;
The Paphian Goddess bathed thy lips in dew,
And lent thy form ambrosial harmony.
My soul would perish in the melting gaze,
But for thine eyes, where Hope for ever plays." [The Greek anthology]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:07 pm

Quote :
It is all the more surprising, then, for Miss Harrison to say, " No one could doubt, on looking at Orpheus and Eurydice, that this is an instant of irrevocable separation." 2 In fact, many have doubted, and on good evidence, that this is the tragic moment when Orpheus turned to look at Eurydice and lost her. Bowra says "the relief displays too little distress for so tragic a catastrophe." 3 Guthrie notes that other representations of the descent " show an Orpheus who might well be supposed to be at home in the underworld, without the necessity of any conjugal errand to account for his presence." 4 More important still is the fact that in every literary reference to the myth antecedent to, contemporary with and for at least three centuries subsequent to the relief, there is no second loss of Eurydice. In Euripides (Aic., 357-362 with scholiast), Isokrates (Busiris, XI, Cool, pseudo-Heraclitus (De Incred., 21), Hermesianax (Athenaeus, Deipn., XIII, 597b-c), Moschus (III, 115-25), Diodorus Siculus (IV, 25, 4) and the Orphic Argonautica (40-42), Orpheus is clearly thought to have been successful in resurrecting Eurydice. In Plato's version (Syrmp., 179d, a classic example of his bias against musicians and penchant for private mythmaking), Orpheus is not given his wife at all; he is shown a phantom and sent away.  Not until the Culex and Virgil's Georgics does the story of Orpheus' backward glance occur in literature. This has been noted many times,5 and the philologist is understand-ably confused when the archaeologist persists in applying what appears to be a first-century or at best Hellenistic interpretation to a fifth-century monument.

It will be objected that the details of the relief will fit only the Virgilian story: Orpheus has turned, he has gently brushed the veil from Eurydice's face; she looks into his eyes and tenderly lays her left hand on his shoulder, while her right is firmly clasped by Hermes, the winged escort of the dead. To this one can reply that the relief may have prompted the story, and not vice versa.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kvasir

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 814
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 32
Location : Gleichgewicht

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:07 pm

Wonderful Gem:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
perpetualburn

avatar

Gender : Male Posts : 939
Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : MA

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Tue Jul 29, 2014 10:28 pm

Quote :
Orpheus and Eurydice, “two forms / of the one love,” are, following Orpheus’
death, “restored and mutual.” The sense here is of the nature of romantic love as union (e.g. “my better half,” “soul-mates,” and other common expressions), a union done violence to by the fitfulness of life – and solved by death, which removes the catastrophic risk of one hurting or dying without the other. Donna Tartt illustrates the experience of a circumscribed and mortal self:

"But isn’t it also pain that often makes us most aware of self?
It is a terrible thing to learn as a child that one is a being
separate from all the world, that no one and no thing hurts
along with one’s burned tongues and skinned knees, that
one’s aches and pains are all one’s own."

On the one hand Eurydice, dying without her husband, suffers most from this
phenomenon. But the other side of the predicament of singularity – that no other is or can be aligned with oneself to the point of sharing experience and pain – is that the other, even and especially the beloved other, is unforgivably liable to pains and loss that leave the lover lonely in the limits of his empathy.


Quote :
In the Orpheus myth, only Orpheus is present (literally, on earth, and figuratively as a character) enough to be wounded by the phenomenon of singularity. In fact, his life, from the point of Eurydice’s first death to his only one, is a tribute to this wound and his attempts both to correct it and come to terms with it. The risk of separation and disconnection characteristic of love between two people is not loss of self, but loss of the other. So the reader experiences the loss of Eurydice with Orpheus, not with Eurydice: we do not grieve for her losing her life, but for Orpheus losing her presence. Eurydice, loved, may lose her life – but Orpheus, loving, must be prepared at every moment for the distance, alienation, and loss of his lover. Less terrible than the self in isolation is the other in isolation: one must cope with sensation and even death affecting one’s lover alone; one must survive them.

Maurice Blanchot, in his essay “Literature and the Right to Death,” articulates this
danger:

"When I say, "This woman," real death has been announced
and is already present in my language; my language means
that this person, who is here right now, can be detached
from herself, removed from her existence and her presence
and suddenly plunged into a nothingness in which there is
no existence or presence; my language essentially signifies
the possibility of this destruction; it is a constant, bold
allusion to such an event."

Blanchot describes not the experience of loving a person – a woman, specifically – prone to the threats of mortality, but something more insidious: the route by which the death of the other is conceptualized, made possible and likely within the framework of one’s worldview. In this sense, the task with which Orpheus grapples is not his wife’s death but the fact that he lives within a world in which his wife can die. This is where Barthes’ statement comes in, that “an always present I is constituted only by a confrontation with an always absent you . . . the subject’s place and the other’s place cannot permute.” In this way the experience of the lover becomes synonymous with that extreme solitude: to
love is to come to terms, or to be forced to come to terms, with the distance and danger of the other, the impossibility of union. Jean-Paul Sartre describes the fundamental rupture between the self and what exists outside of it: “The reality of that cup is that it is there and that it is not me. We shall interpret this by saying that the series of its appearances is bound by a principle which does not depend on my whims

Marcel Proust, while cognizant of the dangers that adhere to the phenomenon of
loving something not oneself, marks these dangers as, also, one great strength of it. According to his view, the act of loving can be an attempt to overcome the pain of singular existence described by Tartt. Loving another admits access to those parts of the world unknown – that is, everything outside of the self. Aligning oneself with another human being allows one to conceptualize what it is like to exist as something not oneself: an awareness that the singularity of existence can make, or make appear, absolutely untenable. The ultimate task, as poet Rainer Maria Rilke phrases it, is to “love life in a form that is not your own”: a visceral coming to terms with the extent of the world and those within it that are ultimately alien and ultimately perishable.76 Friedrich Nietzsche describes love, ideally, as the internalization of this truth, arguing that it amounts to “the understanding and rejoicing in the fact that another person lives, acts, and experiences otherwise than we do.” Similarly, Erich Fromm says that “love is union with somebody, or something, outside oneself, under the condition of retaining the separateness and integrity of one's own self.”  Interaction between two people implies, without fail, an encounter with a different perspective, set of experiences, and way of existing in the world. Here, to an extent, the benefit of love: a coming to terms with the fact that others are not oneself, are fundamentally distant from oneself, that their existence is not a function of one’s own. A way out of the too-circumscribed self, a transcendence of it, is made tentatively possible.

Roland Barthes notes further, in his discussion of absence, that: “This endured
absence is nothing more or less than forgetfulness. I am, intermittently, unfaithful. This is the condition of my survival; for if I did not forget, I should die. The lover who doesn’t forget sometimes dies of excess, exhaustion, and tension of memory.” Orpheus does exactly this. He never forgets the grief of having lost Eurydice; his inability to move beyond it and accede to the Maenads’ request for sex is what costs him his life. The Maenads, followers of Dionysus consumed by the abandon of bacchanalia, are attracted to Orpheus and demand that he join them. Since the second loss of Eurydice, however, Orpheus has sworn off sex with women, and he denies the Maenads. Infuriated, they tear him to pieces.

According to Barthes’ reading, it seems almost that Orpheus is guilty of loving
too much. His love is an unlivable one, irreconcilable with the mortal world. Emmet
Robbins, detailing the progression of the myth, notes that, “to the Romantics and to [thetwentieth] century he has been the eternal seeker beyond the threshold.”81 If we return to Blanchot’s remarks on “this woman” and her death, it might be said that Orpheus never actually metabolizes these ideas: his love admits no possibility of the death of the other, and that gives rise to both his successes and failures as a lover. Refusing to acknowledge death allows him to descend into hell and earn back Eurydice’s life. His success as a lover is indicated by his continued popularity as one of the great mythical lovers – even his look behind as, sometimes, proof of love without limit. He fails, though, in that there is no room in his love for trust of Eurydice as a separate and distinct human being: the ultimate task, it turns out, for which he has failed to prepare. He loves her so much that he cannot come to terms with a world in which either of them can exist outside the sight or the life of the other.

It is for this reason that he descends to the underworld to rescue his lover (the
only hero in mythology to embark on a katabasis for that reason): he has not capitulated to the possibility of her dying while he lives. He goes to the underworld because he loves Eurydice so much that he refuses to recognize a world in which he can be parted from her, separable – the separation for which he is named – and not unified. But then the tables are turned, and limitless love can no longer help him: success, during that critical ascent, is for Orpheus contingent upon the restraint of sight and impulse. The act of believing that the loved and mortal other exists outside one’s scope of sight and certainty is presented as both his best hope and beyond his capability. The consuming passion of Orpheus, the over, aggravates the perils of mortality. Trust in the life of the one’s beloved is, it may be, offered as a solution to the problem of lovers existing in separate and mortal bodies.

Quote :
The prescript of the gods – that Orpheus not, at all costs, look behind him –
amounts to an injunction for him to trust, fundamentally, that Eurydice exists as separate from him: a being capable of existing while he is not looking at her. “Everything is at stake in the decision of the gaze,” writes Blanchot in his essay “The Gaze of Orpheus.” Orpheus and Eurydice could be happy, by Nietzsche and Fromm’s definition of love, if he can make it up to the mortal world without looking. All he has to do is make it to the top believing that Eurydice is alive, that both can be alive outside of the sight of each other: that loneliest and most redeeming aspect of love. But – ultimately, fatally, understandably, irrevocably – he has to check, and make sure. His trust in her existence as not contingent to his own fails him; and so he loses her. We know as little as we do about Eurydice because Orpheus knows that little: because he loves without admitting strangeness, without acknowledging and accepting the necessary horror of solitude.

Quote :
But the myth has endured, in its permutations and repossessions, out of a desire to read the story of Orpheus and Eurydice as true to our lived experience – and, when it is not, to create it anew. There is little interest evidenced in allegory; the story enthralls, the story survives, out of an indomitable and unconscious will to treat Orpheus and Eurydice as real people about whom we know relatively little. Rather than allegory, the myth gains its greatest resonance and possibility, as a bridge between individuals and the stories and forces that buffet them, as a true story, obscured. True how? However you like; however you wish to extract what details are obscured. The myth is ours now.

digitalcommons.bard.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1217&context=senproj_s2011
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:08 am

s: Heathen.


_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:08 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Hrodeberto

avatar

Gender : Male Capricorn Posts : 1343
Join date : 2014-07-14
Age : 31
Location : Nova Universalis

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sat Nov 29, 2014 10:53 am

Goethe wrote:


One thing is certain: the ancient artists had as much knowledge of Nature, and as sure an idea of what can be represented and of how it should be done, as Homer himself. Unfortunately, works of art of the highest order are all too few. But when one contemplates them, one's only desire is to get to know them rightly and then to depart in peace. These supreme works of art have been created by men as the highest products of Nature in accordance with true natural laws. Everything arbitrary or merely fanciful falls away; there is necessity, there is God.


Goethe wrote:


Beauty is a manifestation of Nature's secret laws, which would otherwise remain forever hidden.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Hrodeberto

avatar

Gender : Male Capricorn Posts : 1343
Join date : 2014-07-14
Age : 31
Location : Nova Universalis

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Dec 14, 2014 7:51 pm

Steiner, Rudolf wrote:


I have described the evolution of thought from the age of Plato to that of Kant in order to be able to show the impressions which Goethe was bound to receive when he turned to the outcome of the philosophical thoughts to which he might have adhered in order to satisfy his intense desire for knowledge. He found in the philosophies no answer to the innumerable problems which his nature impelled him to face. Indeed, whenever he delved into the world-conception of some particular philosopher, he found an opposition between the drift of his questions and the world of thought from which he would have liked to get counsel. The reason for this lies in the fact that the one-sided Platonic separation of idea and experience was repugnant to his being. When he observed Nature the ideas lay there before him. He could therefore only think of Nature as permeated by ideas. A world of ideas that neither permeates the objects of Nature nor brings about their appearance and disappearance, their becoming and growth, is to him nothing but a feeble web of thought. The logical fabrication of trains of thoughts without penetration into the life and creative activity of Nature appeared to him unfruitful, for he felt himself intimately one with Nature. He looked upon himself as a living member of Nature. In his view, all that arose in his spirit had been permitted by Nature so to arise. Man should not sit away in a corner and imagine that from there he can spin out of himself a web of thoughts which elucidates the true being of things. He should rather allow the stream of world-events to flow through him perpetually. Then he will feel that the world of ideas is nothing else than the active, creative power of Nature. He will not then want to stand above the objects in order to reflect upon them, but he will sink himself into their depths and extract from them all that lives and works in them.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
OhFortunae

avatar

Gender : Male Scorpio Posts : 2478
Join date : 2013-10-26
Age : 23
Location : Land of Dance and Song

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Feb 08, 2015 4:11 pm

Soul and body are one; interconnected with each other; hence we judge behaviour patterns through the outer appearance.
Beauty in a person is symmetry; in art it is the representation of reality or dreams expressed as if they are real.

Statues represent a moment; and when perfectly beautiful, they express this moment in full capacity in regards with health, virility, strength and fertility
- in the moment of courage, grieve, loss, joy, love, rage.
Beauty in a person is the expression of health, vigor, fertility, youthfulness, endurance, will power, balance / proportion
- traits appreciated through means of biological needs and a expression of one's overall behaviour (mind over body or the path of least resistance).

Fat unhygienic people do have a claim upon ''blaming'' their genes, not that their genes have more influence upon the body in regards with becoming faster fat compared to others
- but their laziness and lack of will power and low quality minds have much to do with their genetics.
I judge the mind upon the outer appearance and his/her overall behaviour and expression.


Back to top Go down
View user profile https://plus.google.com/u/0/109705167311303906720/posts
Kvasir

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 814
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 32
Location : Gleichgewicht

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:55 pm

Good point to touch upon.

Physical symmetry and beauty imply genetic fitness, genetic fitness implies superiority, and superiority implies the existence of inferiority. Thus, Subjecting what SHOULD be subjected as unfit or inferior is precisely what the modern liberal agenda fervently wars against, as that guy accurately explains.

This exaltation of defective physical beauty is another piston in the modern engine of cultural degradation. Francis Yockey called them “Culture Distorters”; the insidious agents who contaminate the quality of culture, and a higher life, by turning its strengths into negative anachronistic indulgences that should be replaced by smaller and smaller superficial refinements (atomistic progress) that are more indirect and innocuous to avert the social objective away from quality to quantity.

The sub-sect of the so deemed “Plus-Size Model” trend is also gaining momentum; professional modeling that emphasizes the female attractiveness in what they enjoy reasoning as “luscious curves” “a man loves a woman with meat on her bones”, and any other pop-cultural insecure quip to promote physical inferiority. What these clueless morons do not understand, is that this positive fat appearance is only marketed and praised within reason(which would indicate a prejudice of superiority) of its appearance. They would probably cringe in disgust at a fat model on the cover of a men’s magazine with unsightly stomach rolls and cellulite riddling her thighs, but they would approve of one with smoother more shapely fat endowments. Thus, these messages of the sanctity of weakness comes with its own hypocritical correlation to the very superior tenets they chastise.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14975
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:07 pm

They call themselves "free" when they've detached from reality, comfortable in the artificiality they call "world", and which always implies a manmade system some of them cannot adapt to.

They flipped the definition of Nihilism to now mean anything that lacks the human constructs of meaning, morality, purpose, and having succeeded in this they then proceed to detach all words from reality, "freeing" them to now mean anything for anybody.
So, "freedom" ceases to be a degree of dependency, displaying strength and quality, and becomes a form of delusion, and beauty is disconnected from its references to symmetry and the fitness it insinuates, and now means something ambiguous, spiritual, mystical, which anyone can possess and claim as his/her own.

Perspectivism, where all perspectives are respectable, if they respect, in turn, all other perspectives.
A kind of social agreement; an unstated tolerance of lies, and pretenses, if the other reciprocates...creating a hypocritical (inter)action.

If you search you will find many examples of words being redefined so as to disconnect them from all references to the world, or to phenomena.
Why?
Because the world is indifferent to human bullshit.
Detaching the word frees the concept from this unforgiving phenomenal world, and makes it another toy in the hands of desperate, cowardly, imbeciles, wanting to pat themselves on the back, or exploit some other stunted mind's feebleness.

Looked what those other morons did with the word "value".
Having detached it from reality they could now give it its own ontology.
Value not as appreciation, evaluation, judgment, but value as existing outside space/time, and life.

The one who tells you something that hurts your feelings, is evil, is ill; the one who buys into your lies, and delusions, or, at least, pretends to, opening the door for you to be "nice" in return, is upholding this unstated agreement and so is "good" and "healthy".

The message is clear:
If you cannot offer a solution to the predicament you are exposing, then you must keep silent.
If you do not keep silent you will be treated as would a herd an unwelcome interloper.

Because sheltering leads to rapidly increasing numbers, and the mutations they carry, protected from natural culling mechanisms, what happens is the social contract becomes stricter, and the punishment more severe.
This is what political-correctness is.
We can hardly comment on anything anymore, and the subjects where opinions outside the official, popular, narrative are tolerated is shrinking.
Eventually we'll be left with platitudes and chatter about trivialities, like movies and sports statistics.

This is dumbing-down.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
OhFortunae

avatar

Gender : Male Scorpio Posts : 2478
Join date : 2013-10-26
Age : 23
Location : Land of Dance and Song

PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance Sun Mar 08, 2015 5:57 pm

The representation of changing ideals.

Back to top Go down
View user profile https://plus.google.com/u/0/109705167311303906720/posts
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Beauty, Art and Appearance

Back to top Go down
 
Beauty, Art and Appearance
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» TRUTH OF LIFE: Love & beauty
» The beauty of our world
» Look at this beauty...Sobhan Allah
» The Low Carb Dietitian's Guide to Health and Beauty by Registered Dietitian and Certified Diabetes Educator Franziska Spritzler
» the beauty.................

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA :: TECHNE-
Jump to: