Why do we consider some things beautiful and others not? One could easily observe that what one person might consider attractive another could consider unattractive and vice versa - so there is clearly an element of subjectivity involved. So too does one find a sense of ambiguity in the function of things. One person’s walking stick could be another person’s back scratcher and so on. Yet in spite of the existence of such subjectivity there remain boundaries that appear to encapsulate the vast majority of opinions.
For example, the gnarled walking stick could find itself used for a variety of purposes by different people but very few would consider using it as a toothpick. It proves too unwieldy and imprecise for such a purpose. Likewise a spoon is less likely to be seen as a potential cleaver than it is to be used as a shovel.
This suggests that the form of an item conveys potential purpose and the subjectivity enters in evaluating the suggested uses conveyed in their interpretations of any such item.
A little more tricky is the evaluation of aesthetic as such is not necessarily tied to a function. While a technically-minded person might consider the workings of the engine of a motor vehicle to be attractive, especially if part of the criteria is the functionality of the engine in question, other persons might prefer the outward appearance of the vehicle. Some prefer sleek, streamlined metalic effects while others might prefer an effect that is more curvacious, robust, fortituous.
Then one considers the element of art - works of aethetic pleasure where their aesthetic value is the function. One might find the self wondering about the functional value, such as with the case of a slender sculpture of delicate crystal or such. Since works of art tend not to consider functionality they can consequently be fragile.
The best fusions of aesthetics and function tend to be found in nature. The trees bend in the wind. Some species attract mates through their aesthetic attributes. The silence of winter precedes the awakening of spring. So successful is this blend of aesthetics and function in nature that humans seek to emulate. We see research into the propulsion and dimensions of certain kinds of fish. Some of the pioneering designs in aircraft were based upon the biology of birds. Motor vehicles regularly come out in a shape eliciting association with some mammal of speed. Nature has it right. There is no such thing as aesthetics without function and neither is there such a thing as function without aesthetic implication.
Entries (RSS)