Correlative beauty and the sense of aesthetic ⇒ Kirno Sohochari

…
Our aesthetic sense is not an absolute thing. I think it is correlative. The meaning of beauties are unstable. They could be change by the flow of time. The inner meaning of beauty is abstract and linked by the surface where it is blossoming. Sense of beauty was developing in our brain cell when we were elevated to the primate stage to leave behind the reptile age. The giant Dinosaur had killing instinct instead of carrying love and affection to their partner. They were horrendous in their gigantic shape and you could not say that these reptiles are not beautiful. Horrific thing could be beautiful due to the action.

Beauty-sense is contradictory and relative. You could not draw an outline that ‘This is beautiful and that is not’. Our aesthetic sense is reformatory and not eternal to the end, because, everything in the tiny planet is transitive and transitory due to the velocity of motion. Nothing is able to stands as permanent and eternal. The law of motion is works everywhere to fracturing the permanent. We approved the truth once then we have to consenting the argument that the science of beauty is not an eternal thing.

I think it’s shocking for poet and artist. Our poetic view likes to praise the eternity, because, it is not varying in time. The poetic vision needs something trusted and it will not fragment by the changes of time. Today’s world is more hypocritical for the poet and artist. The vibrancy of classical beauties is no more exist in anywhere of the world.

---

The signal of the story is that, time is coming to change our views about the sense of beauty and beast. They are not partial thing as we think.

---

The bubbling of water is not classical or eternal despite its beauties. Even though, the beautiful women are not eternally fictional in their glittering and waved biology. We loved our motherly earth, but she is not classical and eternal in spite of the great tranquility.

Scientific theories are starting its journey to explore the beauties by new definition and it will determinate by them at near future. It is indeed a neo-reality for the poet and artist. They have to understand this rather be protesting it so far.

I concluded my comments by telling you a story of great physicist Richard Feynman. He was very insightful in his thought process. The great physicist had a close friendship with an artist. One day they were walking in the garden. The artist picked a flower and said to Feynman, ‘Hi! Look at this flower! What a beauty!’

Feynman agreed that the flower is beautiful. The artist then said to him:

‘Only an artist can realize this beauty. You scientists are far behind from this. I know you will take the flower and apart from it piece-by-piece and soon the flower becomes a dull and dead thing. It lost its beauty when you dissect it.’

Feynman bit puzzled to hear his complaint but soon replied to him:

---

The bubbling of water is not classical or eternal despite its beauties. Even though, the beautiful women are not eternally fictional in their glittering and waved biology.

---

My friend, I know flower is beautiful. I admire its beauty, but I see something more than beautiful in its petals and you know nothing about this. I don’ think that this is just a flower. I am calling it ‘Flowercell’. This flower has an atomic structure where thousands of atoms are busy to build this beautiful construction. Flowers are fascinating due to the complicated chain of atomic function. You’re drawing the colors of this flower in your canvas and it’s indeed beautiful, but my eyes are going far.

I can imagine the thrilling reaction of atomic chain and it is intentional. The atomic blocks dedicate them to combine the color and smell of a flower for greater interest. The insects are attracted to see this. It is a game of pollination my friend. The insects help the flower to be reborn over-and-again. They loved each other and that’s the beauty of evolution.

When I picked a flower in my hand my imagination going far away and praised the beauty of creation. The beauty is everlasting when you look through the inner structure of any object, where everything is blossoming and changing to the life on a circulating motion. I loved this beauty and praised it with great curiosity. You have no right to tell me an insipid man.

…
I am telling the true story of Feynman by little more exaggeration, but the inner meaning of his comments which he wrote down once by his own hand is not changed. The signal of the story is that time is coming to change our views about the sense of beauty and beast. They are not a partial thing as we think.

When we look through the universe where trillions of stars are dying and transforming into a new shape due to the nuclear fusion, we could not say that they are ugly. Their dreadful transformation also carries the beauty in our telescopic eyes. I think it’s a pick moment for the poet and artist to involve them with the quantum beauties, where innocent and evil both could be beautifully aesthetic due to the action.

…