Sorry everyone for jumping into the conversation so late; I have been on vacation and have been unable to blog. It seems many excellent points have been brought to attention. While reading Chapter 2 "Symbols", I read a brief paragraph (pg 15) which discussed symbolism as it applies to skin color. It explained how tan skin had once been considered ugly because it had represented a life of "farming and other outdoor labor." The paragraph then went on to state that tan skin is now considered "beautiful" because it represents a life of leisure.
This paragraph struck me as slightly odd. I considered what had been said. I agree with Hayakawa that society's definition of human beauty has changed over the years. However, I find it difficult to accept the idea that symbolism is the root cause of our paradigm shift. Is tan skin attractive because of what it represents, or is it just more aesthetically pleasing? Consider some things that symbolize a life of leisure; sports cars, beach houses, plasma tvs, clothing, don't these things symbolize a life of leisure more than a tan? A construction worker can have a tan!
I have concluded that symbolism has no direct influence on our perseption of human beauty; obviously Hayakawa disagrees. One thing I can't account for is the reason why society's perception of beauty has changed. If it isn't symbolism what is the reason? Does the change have to do with the introduction of new ideas, new styles, new cultures? I'm not sure.
What do you all think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
(Blog written by Kevin Trainer)
Post a Comment