Talk:Beauty

Archives (Index)

2023/November 2024/March

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

How the idea of beauty has changed

While there were many excellent points made regarding how beauty is observed in different cultures and the general impact it has in society, I believe there could be information added on how the term "beauty" and its expectations has changed throughout the years and how these changes have impacted society's view on beauty. Jdo pharmd (talk) 05:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Pic in Lede

Hi all, again. In my notes I recently came across the enlightening discussion about the lede pic in the archives, which I first mentioned in 2017. The pic of the rose window is still there, although the caption was suitably modified. I still have considerable difficulty with the pic. We discussed a number of possible alternatives, but as usual in such philosophical matters, there was no satisfactory conclusion to suit all parties. I still feel that the rose window from Chartres cathedral (however aesthetically pleasing) is particularly off-putting to non-christians, and has no meaningful place as a defining image at the top of the article, which is mostly about the aesthetics and philosophy of beauty.

I would suggest that there is no possible image which might seem suitable to everyone, given the vast voids between various world cultures: and that instead, no image should appear at the top of the article, since any picture tends to validate a particular world view. MinorProphet (talk) 16:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I'm not a Christian (although part of a historically Christian culture) and that image looks like a cluttered mess to me. I have no doubt the actual window is rather awesome to see, in the literal sense of that word, but our image doesn't show it. Even when I click on it and expand it to its greatest available magnification, I still can't tell what the detail of the image is. This is showing the fundamental problem with photographs in a place like Wikipedia, not any judgement on my part on whether the subject of that pic is beautiful. And we obviously also have the problem of the subjective nature of beauty. So yes, unless we can agree on a pic with a caption along the lines of "Beauty as perceived by church architects in the 12the century in France", no picture would be the best solution. HiLo48 (talk) 01:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

There were already several lengthy discussion in the archives without consensus. MOS:LEADIMAGE says It is common for an article's lead or infobox to carry a representative image and the lead image should be a natural and appropriate representations of the topic. I'm open to using a different image or possibly a multiple image. To avoid overly culture-specific conceptions of beauty, one could use an image of natural beauty, like a landscape, a sunrise, a flower, a field of flowers, etc. This would probably be better than having no image. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I support the idea of an image of natural beauty. Could we agree on one? HiLo48 (talk) 08:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I added a few candidates below. Any preferences or other suggestions? Phlsph7 (talk) 09:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

No. 2 please. HiLo48 (talk) 10:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Done. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but yech to all of these. Nothing wrong with the natural world, but these pics merely appeal to the visual senses. Eye of the beholder, and all that. Why should be beauty be pictorial and emotional? I find intellectual beauty far more satisfying, as exemplified in Giordano Bruno's neo-Platonic dialogue De gli Eroici Furori ('The Heroic Frenzies'). Bruno (1548–1600) discusses the paths of heroic love in its search for the supreme good, and of the heroic intellect in its search for the supreme truth and beauty. He takes as a starting-point a sonnet by Tansillo on the the ancient myth of Diana and Actaeon as recounted by Ovid in his Metamorphoses. This was explored pictorially 100 years previously by Titian in Diana and Actaeon, but I am certainly not suggesting this as an image (dead white men etc.)

I still prefer Malevich's Black Square which continues to be artistically and philosophically challenging. I know that it's not the sort of thing that yer average reader wants to be confronted by, but the article does in fact concentrate on the philosophical and metaphysical aspects of the concept, not "Oh, isn't that just lovely?" The perceptive reader of the article (the lede is exceptionally good when shorn of an image) will surely feel hard done by when confronted with something emotionally equivalent to a spring lamb. Pass the mint sauce, please. MinorProphet (talk) 18:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

They burned him alive for his ideas, by the way, in the middle of Rome. MinorProphet (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Some of your suggestions seem to be at odds with your initial criticism of having an overly culture-specific image. According to MOS:LEADIMAGE, images should give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page, should avoid contents that readers would not expect to see there, and should be of least shock value. The images about nature suggested below fulfill these requirements: readers see them and know why they are there. Many of your suggestions don't. For example, having an artistically and philosophically challenging image, like the Black Square, is not the right choice at least for a lead image. I feel that we are repeating our earlier archived discussion. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:32, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just rehashing some old points, not making suggestions. There is no absolute requirement for a lede image, and the Alpine scene with all its cultural baggage wouldn't make much sense to a desert-dweller. I was going to repeat my suggestion that no image is best, but the Monet pic (I'm lucky enough to have been to both Chartres and Giverny) gets my vote if we are determined that there should be one. MinorProphet (talk) 13:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't find your argument convincing that a simple photo of a mountain landscape is too culturally biased to be acceptable as a lead image. Do you think that a significant number of our readers are the type of desert-dweller that can't make sense of a mountain landscape? The Monet picture is slightly better than the Black Square but it suffers from similar problems: just by looking at the small thumbnail, it's not clear to the average reader what it presents nor that it is beautiful. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The Monet is tongue in cheek, going by what readers would expect, i'd expect an Aphrodite, Graces, Helen, or Judgement of Paris. fiveby(zero) 10:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

That would be going by what you think a majority of readers would expect. Personally I prefer images from nature. HiLo48 (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Feminine form. What do you think of the Mandelbrot set tho, that's nature. fiveby(zero) 23:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it is, but in the form shown below, not so beautiful. 01:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

You chose #2, a photograph? That's like illustrating Humour with a pun. How about an Aphrodite with nice trees and birds in the background? fiveby(zero) 02:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm sure it would be nice, but this discussion is again proving that we will never all agree. My thoughts return to the second paragraph of the comments of MinorProphet at the beginning. HiLo48 (talk) 02:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the important point here is to find an image that fulfills the requirements specified at MOS:LEADIMAGE independent of our personal preferences. I pointed out several reasons why the Black Square and the Monet picture fail these requirements. I think the nature images originally posted, like the mountain landscape, fulfill these requirements.

If we can't arrive at a consensus on which image to use or whether to have no image, this would mean that the original stable version with the window image is restored. To me it seems there is consensus that the mountain landscape image is an improvement over the window image since no objections in this regard have been voiced. If that's the case, we could use it, even if not everyone agrees that it is the perfect candidate. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

"...since no objections in this regard have been voiced." Except when I said "Sorry, but yech to all of these." "Quot homines, tot sententiae", as my mate Terence observed in Phormio, where at the end of Act 2 Demipho consults his three friends, but they all give contradictory advice. Since we are relying on MOS:LEADIMAGE: "Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic." This appears to be the case, although the mathematical beauty of the infinite Mandelbrot set is very appealing. MinorProphet (talk) 09:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for participating (again) in this lively and good-natured discussion. I can see that this subject arouses many disparate thoughts — {{subst|feelings}}) — and all your views are most welcome. This may be an unconventional approach, but how about the lede having a rotating image, changing every day, using perhaps our Main Page's 'Today's featured picture'? The code to implement this is hidden from the eyes of average mortals, is it even possible?
Courtesy ping: Xaosflux. MinorProphet (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Dynamic (automatically changing) content isn't advised for articles, it may produce very inconsistent results. Perhaps a gallery would work for you? Keep in mind the experience for readers, especially those on common mobile devices, may appear much different than for computer users, so if you try things look at it from multiple clients to see how your changes will be received. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Image suggestions

0 Titian: Diana and Actaeon

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Spring lamb

8 Black Square

9 Monument to Giordano Bruno in Campo de' Fiori square - Rome

10

11

12 The link complement of the Borromean rings, which date back to the 7th century and represent strength in unity. A hyperbolic manifold formed from two ideal octahedra, seen repeatedly in this view. The rings are infinitely far away, at the octahedron vertices.

12+1