imagining a friendly debate at my kitchen table
Aristotle and I
would probably argue at the dinner table
about what constitutes
beauty
beauty he said
is represented in
order
symmetry
definiteness
I differ
all around
and pour us another glass of wine
he sounds a little uptight
beauty I say
is
old more often than new
odd more than even
irregular not regular
free flow over precise
spontaneous rather than meticulous
or at least it seems that way
I say
imperfections are marks
of
strata
history
magic
but you know
there’s been a lot of water under the bridge
since
our guy
philosophized about stuff
I wonder
would he still define
order, symmetry, definiteness
as those things that give
pleasure and satisfaction
today?
maybe
published in the beautiful Bella Grace!
Lovely! A great imagining. And gorgeous photograph of the sundial.
I like your version! He probably would define it the same way though.
Thank you for being my moment of beauty today. 🙂
I loved it! Wonderful writing. x
Thank you Alex! I’ve had that image for a long time and always loved it.
hehe, me too Susan. And I agree – he’d probably not budge.
Aw gee thanks Susannah. It’s just me rambling, taking out half the words and organizing them on the page. My apologies to creative prose writers everywhere!
The sundial is exquisite. When it comes to a discussion of beauty I can’t go past Keats and his Grecian urn and his ‘beauty is truth, truth beauty.’ I think the truth component does relate to Aristotle’s position in a way because order, symmetry and definiteness are components of truth. That would be one whale of a dinner convo wouldn’t it? No one would get a word in!
hehe it would be a fun conversation! I think concepts of beauty come from our times – so maybe the participants could never see eye to eye on it, no matter how many glasses of wine!