Poetry Forum

Full Version: Beauty, Love... Which one needs the other most?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
    Feel free to elaborate on your answer.
If it's romantic, sexual love, then well, love needs beauty. Except in rare cases, facial and bodily symmetry and the golden mean drive romance.
none need either. though we may adore beauty we don't fall in love with beauty while love is beautiful, it doesn't need beauty to endure. while there are many loves, we can define most of them; beauty on the other hand is in the eye of the beholder.
(09-12-2017, 09:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]If it's romantic, sexual love, then well, love needs beauty. Except in rare cases, facial and bodily symmetry and the golden mean drive romance.

The detection/appreciation of beauty is a facet/subset of love, broadly understood.
Jesus Christ, that is a loaded question.

OP, that is a very loaded question. I'm pretty sure I don't have the spiritual, moral, or philosophical acumen for this kind of discussion -- not without spouting out poetry, aka work I don't have to be fully conscious of. But considering this is a poetry forum...

Actually, even if this weren't a poetry forum, and even with my limited facilities, what exactly do you mean by "love", or by "beauty", or by "need"? Because if, in this discussion, there's no commonly agreed upon meaning for those three things, then the best answer would be "other", with all three terms being ultimately too ambiguous to lead to anything fruitful. Or am I supposed to supply my own definitions, in which case I refer to my second paragraph.
To me love and beauty are those roots sticking out of the earth when you're climbing. I dig myself into holes and have to dig my way out every day. You reach for those roots for support and sometimes they're loose and come out of the ground. So you have to test them lightly but fully, and if they aren't firmly rooted you have to find something else to grab hold to, maybe just dig your fingers into dirt. But love is more painful, and beauty more dangerous. I can love anyone I find beautiful. Those feelings attract me to misery. Those feelings make me want to lay down my life for a person even when she's not in danger. But love needs beauty, some beautiful sense. Beauty doesn't need love. Beauty is a monster that indifferently feeds on love though it prefers to be thought of as a vegan.
depending on what is perceived as beauty it can be both rare and abundant.
when in love a lot of things can be beautiful, love finds beauty easily or in other words love doesn´t need beauty in its conventional meaning (since it has it already in a broader sense).

if i can´t define beauty can i even answer if it needs love?
everything can have beauty be it easy or hard to see. and everything needs love. the plants and animals we own (if we do), the poems we write, the people we interact with, the plans we make and so on.

i´d say it is beauty that needs love to thrive.. but it can also just exist in a world without sensitive beings.
i think love needs to perceive beauty to exist... but then, it is in the nature of love to perceive beauty.

i guess what i wrote is just circling thoughts but i ll post it anyway (and maybe later think about the cheesiness of my pseudo-philosophy.. i like cheese anyway)
So what's love? Maybe the ability to accept something as it is, in its entity, beautiful in how its uniqueness appeals and pleases. The depth of the love is revealed in its loss, how long and deeply we grieve. I can see the beauty in a thing and love having it around to interact with but can get over its loss in a moment. I grieve a pet forever but not with the depth I miss the beauty, the components put together to create the individual, that soothed and amazed me by experiencing its existence, of people I love. Someone else's order may vary.

So the more one loves the more beauty they find and the more beauty one finds, the more love.

So I can't answer your question about need, for me they are pretty much one. Can someone who cannot love see beauty? Can someone who cannot see beauty love? I wouldn't know. Smile

Hi, Ray, Big Grin
(09-12-2017, 09:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]If it's romantic, sexual love, then well, love needs beauty. Except in rare cases, facial and bodily symmetry and the golden mean drive romance.

How romantic to reduce it to a scientific equation. tongueincheek

Love makes the beloved more beautiful.
Besides, when the lights are off, who gives a shit about symmetry? Nobody.

To the question, love looks for beauty. Boredom is always a lack of love.
Beauty asked love, am I beautiful
Love replied of course you are
but you don't need beauty to be beautiful
and I would love you even if you weren't

Love asked beauty, am I loved
Beauty replied, I'm beautiful
And run away saying,
Why do you need to be loved

Love was trying to find beauty again
and bumped into lust,
Have you seen beauty said love
who gives a fuck said lust.
(09-13-2017, 07:00 AM)Keith Wrote: [ -> ]Beauty asked love, am I beautiful
Love replied of course you are
but you don't need beauty to be beautiful
and I would love you even if you weren't

Love asked beauty, am I loved
Beauty replied, I'm beautiful
And run away saying,
Why do you need to be loved

Love was trying to find beauty again
and bumped into lust,
Have you seen beauty said love
who gives a fuck said lust.
Hysterical
where does the beauty go after death? yet we still love them beauty is an abstract and love is an abstract. we love what we see other be that's not loving beauty, that's loving the person for who they are, not what they are. even elephant man could use a bit of love. often we love because we are loved first. love needs love beauty needs adoration.
(09-13-2017, 07:56 AM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]where does the beauty go after death? yet we still love them beauty is an abstract and love is an abstract. we love what we see other be that's not loving beauty, that's loving the person for who they are, not what they are. even elephant man could use a bit of love. often we love because we are loved first. love needs love beauty needs adoration.
I'm more in agreement with your first post, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don't know that beauty needs adoration, it just is, whether anyone notices or not. Love, on the other hand, needs a interactive spark.   big hug
I want them to be twin sisters who often hold hands
and wear the same colours as a joke, to trick folks.
Let's imagine they are identicals
and people get them mixed up, sometimes.
When one is weak, without even knowing it,
the other might become stronger.
They teach each other stuff, not on purpose.
It's just that way between them.
They are almost the same, but they are different.
Beauty wears canvas sneakers (with flowers),
Love wears running shoes.
hi ellajam!
that´s what i think too, beauty doesn´t need adoration to exist.. it´s people that need adoration (at least sometimes).
isn´t adoration close to love? if i adore something i do love it in a way.
sometimes i think beauty is an interactive thing too.

-----------

hi keith!
i like that poem, especially the part where beauty ran away the second love doubts.
and beauty itself had no real answer.. it seems that beauty as a concept is more like an adjective and love is a noun (it´s late and i don´t know if that makes sense).

(09-13-2017, 11:06 AM)nibbed Wrote: [ -> ]I want them to be twin sisters who often hold hands
and wear the same colours as a joke, to trick folks.
Let's imagine they are identicals
and people get them mixed up, sometimes.
When one is weak, without even knowing it,
the other might become stronger.
They teach each other stuff, not on purpose.
It's just that way between them.
They are almost the same, but they are different.
Beauty wears canvas sneakers (with flowers),
Love wears running shoes.

hi nibbed!
and i do like this poem.. love wears running shoes (although i am no expert concerning the bible i am reminded of one very beautiful passage talking about love)
(09-13-2017, 06:49 AM)Lizzie Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-12-2017, 09:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]If it's romantic, sexual love, then well, love needs beauty. Except in rare cases, facial and bodily symmetry and the golden mean drive romance.

How romantic to reduce it to a scientific equation. tongueincheek

Love makes the beloved more beautiful.
Besides, when the lights are off, who gives a shit about symmetry? Nobody.

To the question, love looks for beauty. Boredom is always a lack of love.

But to get to the stage where the lights will be turned off, the players in this drama need to be beautiful. 
Otherwise, when the lights are off, the participants are probably picturing other people. Now that's fine as a compromise, but is it love?That's what international pick up artist Rooshv says.

Now everyone has different standards, because we're all ugly to varying degrees. For someone, a woman who's a 5 is beautiful enough to fall in love with, because he himself is quite average looking. A woman who's an 8 is more beautiful, but out of his league, and evolution has programmed him to get turned off by that, because in another era, the king of the tribe would've smashed his bollocks.

(09-12-2017, 10:22 PM)RiverNotch Wrote: [ -> ]Jesus Christ, that is a loaded question.

OP, that is a very loaded question. I'm pretty sure I don't have the spiritual, moral, or philosophical acumen for this kind of discussion -- not without spouting out poetry, aka work I don't have to be fully conscious of. But considering this is a poetry forum...

Actually, even if this weren't a poetry forum, and even with my limited facilities, what exactly do you mean by "love", or by "beauty", or by "need"? Because if, in this discussion, there's no commonly agreed upon meaning for those three things, then the best answer would be "other", with all three terms being ultimately too ambiguous to lead to anything fruitful. Or am I supposed to supply my own definitions, in which case I refer to my second paragraph.

I'd say that the commonly agreed upon meaning is what's there in a dictionary. Otherwise we can spend hours debating the meaning of every word.
Or make an assumption and construct your answer based on that.
(09-13-2017, 01:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-13-2017, 06:49 AM)Lizzie Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-12-2017, 09:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]If it's romantic, sexual love, then well, love needs beauty. Except in rare cases, facial and bodily symmetry and the golden mean drive romance.

How romantic to reduce it to a scientific equation. tongueincheek

Love makes the beloved more beautiful.
Besides, when the lights are off, who gives a shit about symmetry? Nobody.

To the question, love looks for beauty. Boredom is always a lack of love.

But to get to the stage where the lights will be turned off, the players in this drama need to be beautiful. 
Otherwise, when the lights are off, the participants are probably picturing other people. Now that's fine as a compromise, but is it love?That's what international pick up artist Rooshv says.

Now everyone has different standards, because we're all ugly to varying degrees. For someone, a woman who's a 5 is beautiful enough to fall in love with, because he himself is quite average looking. A woman who's an 8 is more beautiful, but out of his league, and evolution has programmed him to get turned off by that, because in another era, the king of the tribe would've smashed his bollocks.

It's strange to me that someone can think of love as so entirely visual.
I think attraction involves the whole person.
Love has nothing to do with the visual.

What studies are you referencing? Huh

I think Ray proposed this false dichotomy just to watch us chase our own tails.... Big Grin
(09-13-2017, 02:41 PM)Lizzie Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-13-2017, 01:22 PM)Achebe Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-13-2017, 06:49 AM)Lizzie Wrote: [ -> ]How romantic to reduce it to a scientific equation. tongueincheek

Love makes the beloved more beautiful.
Besides, when the lights are off, who gives a shit about symmetry? Nobody.

To the question, love looks for beauty. Boredom is always a lack of love.

But to get to the stage where the lights will be turned off, the players in this drama need to be beautiful. 
Otherwise, when the lights are off, the participants are probably picturing other people. Now that's fine as a compromise, but is it love?That's what international pick up artist Rooshv says.

Now everyone has different standards, because we're all ugly to varying degrees. For someone, a woman who's a 5 is beautiful enough to fall in love with, because he himself is quite average looking. A woman who's an 8 is more beautiful, but out of his league, and evolution has programmed him to get turned off by that, because in another era, the king of the tribe would've smashed his bollocks.

It's strange to me that someone can think of love as so entirely visual.
I think attraction involves the whole person.
Love has nothing to do with the visual.

What studies are you referencing? Huh

I think Ray proposed this false dichotomy just to watch us chase our own tails.... Big Grin

Love starts off by being visual, then involves the whole person. Eventually, it morphs into familiarity, then contempt, which explains the divorce rate.
Again, I'm talking about sexual love, not filial love or platonic 'love' or a love of gooseberries.
if beauty needs no adoration why do we rate it. why do we have contests to show it off.what is beauty to a blind man? we [i like to think] are all beautiful; if that be the case then it needs no love. sadly we've been brainwashed into seeing beauty as something special. we don't love because of beauty we love because of love. we admire beauty to some extent but even then it wholly subjective. my beauty might be someone else's pig. i think beauty [in people] often comes down to how they look. love creates beauty but is that the same beauty being spoken of here? for me that's just the beauty of love itself. love needs no other beauty. and beauty if it truly exists needs no love. even horrible/ugly [on the inside and out] people can love and be loved which sort of shows love doesn't need beauty.

Does beauty need love. i say no. it's love inside beauty, inside all of us that needs love. how is love measured? not by how much or for what reason we love but how and for what reason we ourselves are loved.

as for love and the visual instigating love, the phrase 'love at first site' if true would dictate that at least in some cases this to be true.
This question came from a dream I had (that was a bit like nibbed's poem).
And who better, I thought, than poets to ponder the abstracts? So I posted it.
Considering the immense generalities involved, I think it's a bit like a koan:
something to be meditated upon without any expectation of resolution.

In my dream love was creating beauty.  So my reasoning, when I posted the
question and voted, was that beauty needed love. But now I'm thinking it's
the creator who has the need.  

Psalm 8:3-4
When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Pages: 1 2 3