Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.

Lesson Plans


[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
marcia m eaton (marciameaton)
Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:23:21 -0500

The question raised about "beauty in motion" in kaleidescopes and the
subsequent examplesof other beautifully things as they moving have been,
dare I say it, Beautiful! Here's a related question: There are somethings
(statues, landscapes) that seem to involve motion not just on the part of
the object but also the viewer. One can't really appreciate a forest, for
instance, without walking around in it. And often senses other than sight
are involved; again the forest is a good example. In Eurocentric cultures
we tend to associate beauty primarily with sight and hearing, but think how
much the smell of a forest or a seashore can matter to our aesthetic
appreciation of it. And of course we are forbidden from touching objects
in museums---but don't many sculptures make you want to run your hands over
their surfaces? One good questions to raise with your students might be
whether beautiful sounds, sights, smells, etc. have anything in common. Why
do we use the same word to describe them all? Marcia

  • Maybe reply: Debi13: "Re: beauty"