People can get lost in their own sophistication. Have you ever noticed that there are people who will launch themselves into a dissertation on mathematics, or god in relation to mathematics(!), or advanced physics, or some other thing full of special obscure terms and terminologies that no one else in particular really has much firm grasp of – if indeed anyone does at all...
And they do so with verve, mainly because they feel the thrill of having discovered that they have what passes for them as intelligence. And of course intelligence has had such a great reputation in the past in society generally so it's no wonder they feel a thrill.
I suppose intelligence for these people must seem like some kind of a new toy.
I intend to bring the word 'ethical' - believe it or not - into my argument here. The governing spirit of things that are done – the ethos – in our modern times, could easily be simply erraticism. And so, those entangled in their own webs of complicated ideas and who really are simpletons on every other level – can't tie their own shoelaces and so on – may be acting quite ethically, in laying claim to the present-day high ground of the human intellect. : ) They are presenting a true depiction of their ethos!
From where I stand, today there's just too much – too many foolish and thoughtless iterations of someone else's original ideas or innovations – and none of it shows the formal consistency that a genuine form of ethics would donate to a validly intelligent human endeavour.
But one has to be careful to distinguish between outward style as deliberate studied design of a human facade or mask, as opposed to the purely opto-graphical capturing of human form as an aesthetical appreciation. This is the difference between the work of Helmut Newton and say – Ellen von Unwerth (who created the photograph to the right). I don't personally believe Newton wanted to show an appreciation of the human form, as much as he desired to explore an intellectual juxtapositioning of human things but involving the human form and this of course comes across almost always as erotic and sexual style. Von Unwerth, on the other hand, I would say explores a simple direct aesthetic appreciation of the human form as her main photographical subject matter without too much extra symbolic meaning. Her work often appears decadent but why this should be so in the sense of style escapes me. Maybe the human form is decadent!
People who know me know I have a great interest in design – industrial design, commercial design, also design in personal style as typified by the well-known stylists: Panté, Lagerfeld, Armani, and so on.
The intellectual ethics of style – once you disregard the current ADHD-afflicted, erratic mindset – goes like this:
A theme must be consistently carried through across the whole of the subject matter. The lace face-mask is mirrored by the lace-covered high-heeled shoes. This implied intellectual vision of style shows the fabric (lace) as translucent, confidential, ornate yet honest. It reminds us also of the Tao – black and obscure or impenetrable in part and clear and penetrable in another part. The surface and the internal. The front and the rear. Et cetera. It recalls to us the Hermetic Code: 'As above so below.' What we cannot see will be as one with what we can see.
Beneath the skirt we will expect the underwear to be black Chantilly lace, oui? And so too must the wearer themselves also be translucent, confidential, ornate yet honest. This is the meaning of personal ethics in relationships. Of course this is just one example of something where style is consistently expressed. I am not sure that people today quite so deliberately intend to express themselves as definitely as the image example I have just suggested, but the effect is that a personal inner haphazardness still comes across. We cannot escape the meaning of what we look like. Whether we like it or not. Some people think they are being very clever by employing complex facades and calling it style – but old hands see through them very easily.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your considered comments are welcome