Wednesday 11 July, 2007

WHAT IS BEAUTY?

"It's a beauty", my dad would exclaim, when he'd see a flick of the wrist and a shot that went across the boundary. That was about the time I was studying the Harappa and Mohenjo Daro civilisations in school, and 'beauty' would conjure up images of the caption below a picture of a young girl's statue discovered among the Indus Valley ruins.

An age of difference here, but the connection's not as tenuous as it appears. Essentially, beauty is what hits the eye -- or the other senses -- and gets lodged in our sub-conscious over time, through repitition.
All our overtly expressed notions of beauty relate to concepts of immediate recall: nature, women, music and so on... It's primal, if it relates to the senses, and quite possible that images and concepts of beauty are stored in our collective unconscious as a human race.

A study recently released in the journal Psychological Science showed that what we think is attractive or beautiful is whatever requires the least amount of effort.
A lot like watching television: A soporific for the mind. There's an entire generation out there that's picking up its concept of beauty (read attractiveness) from Paris Hilton and Victoria Spice. Imagine that.

It's no surprise, then, that advertising relies heavily on these very concepts of 'beauty' to peddle products -- from two-wheelers to cosmetics to even homes. A favourite hunting ground for feminists. Naomi Wolf argues, in her 1991 best-seller, The Beauty Myth, that the old myth that women were fulfilled as housewives and mothers was gradually replaced by advertisers with what she calls "the beauty myth." To be accepted in the world of the liberated and independent “new woman,” she says, one has to meet rigid standards of slimness, beauty and fashion.
Interesting, how she puts it: "How to make sure that busy, stimulated working women would keep consuming at the levels they had done when they had all day to do so and little else of interest to occupy them? A new ideology was necessary that would compel the same insecure consumerism; that ideology must be, unlike that of the Feminine Mystique (Betty Friedan's “feminine mystique” -- advertisers consciously manipulate their portrayals of women to ensure they serve as good consumers), a briefcase-sized neurosis that the working woman could take with her to the office..."

Feminine mystique or not, feminist movement or not, one thing's for sure: In an increasingly consumerist, appearance-obsessed world such as the one we live in, we constantly get "constructed", interpreted images of skin-deep beauty. Maya, perhaps? A grand illusion? In all this clutter, you wonder: What IS true beauty?
And what kind of beauty gives you happiness?

'Beauty is truth, truth beauty — that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know,' said John Keats. My criteria come pretty close: Compassion, above all. An all-encompassing love, irrespective of prejudices. Plus honesty, confidence (a certain self-assuredness), and tonnes of creative energy.

6 comments:

Kshama said...

Yoohoo! Will you all accept me as I am then? 'coz I just can't seem to get rid of that 'middle age spread' which likes me as a host.
While u r at it, can u get me a double scoop of butter sctch crunch, please? and a side dish of langra aam??!

Ramana Rajgopaul said...

Shubha, this is Ramana Uncle from Pune. I am impressed. Keep it up.

Sharan Sharma said...

hmm...two points i don't quite agree with:

1) > There's an entire generation out there that's picking up its concept of beauty (read attractiveness) from Paris Hilton and Victoria Spice.

i think that's not the beauty part that's working here. It's more about being popular by other ways. Money perhaps?

> Compassion, above all. An all-encompassing love, irrespective of prejudices. Plus honesty, confidence (a certain self-assuredness), and tonnes of creative energy.

By this definition, all the compassionate people would be 'beautiful'! Sure, this is an alternate definition of beauty but really, i think it's completely overlooking the physical aspect which is not convincing.

Shubha said...

Well, the point I was making was that beauty as I would like to perceive it is more holistic, and not confined to the physical space... Of course my head turns, just as everyone else's, at a stunningly beautiful/attractive person/object. But that is only part of the picture, what say?

And hey, money, yes, but what hits you when you see a Rakhi Sawant? Money? I doubt.... Money goes in with overall image that sinks into the psyche, but as first impressions go, I think it's looks alone...

Sharan Sharma said...

wokay, madam :)

Anonymous said...

Have we forgotten that it's all about perception?
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder.
I also agree with you that the core goodness does give a glow to the person.