RE William's: "Goya beauty, I think so. Derek wants to define beauty as limited to the pretty. "
I would never call the "Venus and Adonis" in question 'pretty'. Kinkade is pretty. But between Veronese and Kinkade there is a yawning gulf. As for the Goya, if you want to stand in front of "The Witches Sabbath" in question and say out loud 'isn't it beautiful', feel free! RE: 'Derek, of course, will disagree because he must. That's how he retains his identity.' And William will stick to the idea that art = beauty because that is one of the ways traditional aesthetics retains its identity (no matter how incongruous the idea in cases such as the Goya). Derek Allan http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm ------------------------------- Goya beauty, I think so. Derek wants to define beauty as limited to the pretty. But beauty (as aroused in us) can be ferocious and paradoxical. In Goya we experience paradoxical beauty. It's the beauty of what is absent rather than what is present. When we see Goya's major ptgs. we are confronted with various forms of human failure, some violent, some just a matter of being dumb. What I've seen in so many Goya ptgs. is exquisite color and very subtle paint handling (not to mention compositions, etc.). This often borders on sweetness. But in the midst of such paradisacal color and poise are an abundance of human failing, fear, anxiety, supersitition. The beauty we attribute to is our sensing what is lost. Goya is a realist. His paintings (and everything else he did) show us what man has done to his earthly paradise, how he has given up Eden. The horror we feel with Goya is made clear by our sensing what has been foresaken. So Goya, I believe, is as much about beauty as any artist who chooses other means to attain it. Derek, of course, will disagree because he must. That's how he retains his identity. For him to agree would mean giving up or sharing a bit of his selfness. Goya, a unequalled genius, would have liked to paint his portrait. WC -- -m
