Log in

28 January 2007 @ 11:57 am
Smallness and simplicity and beauty  
Most Americans' preferences have been shaped by lots of advertising. Bigger and more are what advertisers push.

So, the only people occupying most small and simple houses are people that would be in bigger more elaborate ones if they could afford to. Then, trashy yards happen because addiction to "stuff" doesn't end just because there's no place to put it.

I have thought about "what is beauty?" since I was very young.
I have decided it can be very complex. But, essentially it is the instant perception by the unconscious of virtues.

When applied to human places I think this definition's "virtues" include harmony, contentment and generosity.

Most small, simple houses are poorly maintained because the occupants value "stuff" and bigness, but they can only afford small and simple.

This is not harmony, it is clash. So, it is perceived subconsciously not as beauty but as ugliness.

And, the yards full of junk reflect craving more material things or an obsessive habit of aquiring them rather than the virtue of contentment.

And finally, the fact that the occupants don't care whether these perceptions result in an uglier world seems to tell us they are not generous people so beauty is diminished even more.

What about poverty?

Well, I know of many rural places such as Amish townships, Quaker areas, and the northwest Ohio ethnic and religious towns I lived in from 1979 to 1983 where the people are poor but their small and simple houses and businesses exude harmony, contentment, and generosity.

But I strongly blame those that aren't poor in America for the fact that most small and simple places are ugly. They are the majority, so they could destroy the valuing in the culture of bigness and moreness that I've just identified as the cause.