Many contemporary artists consider beauty to be a relic, as well as pursuing capturing it in art. Their views and artistic activity often stand for socially engaged art, which is a response to current problems, or focus on fighting against the aesthetic dimension in art (they combine these two attitudes to a varying degree). In their opinion, beauty in art is not only unnecessary but also can be harmful. I think this belief arises largely from mistaking terms and from deficiently deepened reflection. We should start with rudiments that are defining terms, thus in the first instance let us reflect on what exactly beauty is.
I observed that in the eyes of opponents of beauty, it is marked by superficiality, concentration on form instead of content, decorativeness. It is a certain set of qualities perceived by senses, which is supposed to generate a feeling of pleasure. Art that is distinguished by such a conception of beauty is just a decoration. Also I oppose this artistic approach because it does not have any deeper values. However, I think that in such case we should not speak about beauty but only about meaningless aestheticisation.
Nevertheless, there is a different, fuller way of understanding beauty. According to this, we can speak about beauty only if the aesthetic dimension is deepened by an immaterial aspect. In such an event, the set of qualities perceived by senses aims to cause spiritual resonance in its audience. Experience of this kind of beauty was accurately essentialised by the Russian philosopher, Siemion L. Frank, who wrote that while communing with beauty, we sight in outer reality something related to our intimate depth[1]. Beauty affecting us this way is entwined with human spirituality, which we should understand to mean a world of inner sensibility of every man, not associated with any particular religion[2]. It is sometimes called true beauty, however, in my texts, I will term it profound beauty. It is not a value for its own sake but a perceptible manifestation of what we cannot experience with senses.
The immaterial aspect, which resides in profound beauty, may be difficult to perceive and capture because it requires sensibility, openness and ability to concentrate. Hence many artists forget, ignore or do not notice it. This is a root of the misguided and unfair equation of beauty and aestheticisation. We must realise that – going far beyond borders of art – the problem of the contemporary world is not beauty but superficiality (which is frequently confused with beauty). The superficial has not much in common with profound beauty but a lot with kitsch. Therefore, fighting against superficiality by a negation of beauty is an illusion. The negation of beauty is not opposing superficiality – conversely, it is closing to it since, next to aesthetic dimension, it rejects also the depth of immaterial affecting. Thus, while opposing to ubiquitous superficiality, I side with profound beauty, whereby art can cherish and encourage spiritual sensibility of human.
[1] Siemion L. Frank, Niepojęte. Ontologiczny wstęp do filozofii religii, trans. Teresa Obolevitch (Tarnów: Biblos, 2007), p. 219.
[2] Conscious and mature atheistic attitude also may be a source of deep spiritual life.
