On beauty

Author(s): Ben Rogers

Source: RSA Journal, Vol. 156, No. 5543 (Autumn 2010), pp. 26-27
Published by: Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41380034
Accessed: 01-10-2015 04:23 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to RSA Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 119.82.76.227 on Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:23:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

On

beauty

utilitarianism
in our culturemaynothelp.
afterall,is meantto be in the'eyeof
Beauty,
thebeholder',
too subjective
to serveas the
basisforpublicpolicy.
Perhapsmostseriously,
itisclaimedthat'ordinary'
peopledo notvalue
'21stcentury
whotalksaboutbeautyopenshimself
or
RSA hasa newstrapline:
beauty.
Anypolitician
enlightenment'.
herself
Thisinvites
us tolookbacktothefirst
Andnotcompletely
without
up to a chargeofsnobbery.
Enlightenment,
The
a movement
elitescanusetheir'superior'
and
characterised
beliefthat reason:cultured
byitsoptimistic
understanding
andbeautyas a wayofmaintaining
usedandapplied,couldleadto thebettermentaccesstoculture
reason,properly
privilege.
in otherways.Artists,
ofthehumancondition.
architects
reform,
learning,
fellowship, Perhapselitesareresponsible
Progress,
andhappiness
wereitswatchwords.
Wherewasbeautyin and philosophers
liberty
stoppedtalkingaboutbeautyin partforthe
reasonsaboveandin partbecause,tothosewithan avant-garde
thismix,andwouldmodern
care?
enlightenment
You don'thaveto lookfarto see thatbeautywas centralto temperament,
itfeltold-fashioned
andbourgeois.
'Beautification'
connotations
becauseitdenotes
thesuperficial
concern
Voltaire,
Hume,Rousseau,Smithand hasnegative
Enlightenment
thinking.
Kantalltookitforgranted
overfunction,
thatoneimportant
measure
ofprogress withappearance
andother
integrity
'deeper'values.
wasthatmadein thearts,orwhatwassometimes
called'taste'. It seemswe havesomething
ofa comedyofmisunderstanding
Morepractically,
theinfluence
ofEnlightenment
canbe here,withpolicymakers
thatbeautydoesnotmatter
to
thinking
thinking
seenin attempts
to improve
taste- to 'spreadbeautyaround'- theartists
anddesigners,
andartists
itdoes
anddesigners
thinking
educational
reform
andthepromotion
topolicymakers.
remainsurethatit
ofliterature,
Both,meanwhile,
music, notmatter
through
artand,perhaps
aboveall,(neo-classical)
to 'ordinary
architecture.
The RSA's doesnotmatter
people'.
ownHouse,designed
architect
byleadingScottish
Enlightenment
- orwas itconceited?
- Glimpsesof the ideal
RobertAdam,embodies
thisconfident
Yetbeautyis a respectable
commitment
tobeauty.
more
conceptand is againreceiving
The socialandpolitical
The Canadianphilosopher
reformists
ofthe19thand early20th attention.
GlennParsonscharacterises
tended
tohavea strong
cultural
we
century
agenda.ForJohnRuskin beautyas "thatwhichpleasesin virtueof itsperfection";
andhisfollowers,
socialreform
wasinseparable
from
architecturalexperience
withsomething
that
beautywhenwe areconfronted
transformation.
of theArts wewouldnotknowhowtoimprove.
He addsthattheperfection
JohnMaynardKeynes,a founder
thelastreallyimportant
British
thinker
to associated
withbeautyis ofa surprising
Council,wasperhaps
kind,where,giventhe
thepromotion
ofbeauty circumstances,
a thingshouldnotreallybe so good.
and,inparticular,
placecultural
progress
attheheartofhisunderstanding
ofhumanimprovement.
Matthew
Kieranarguesthatthevalue
Meanwhile,
philosopher
Whatabouttoday?
As SimonJenkins,
chairman
oftheNational ofbeautyis notreducible
to itscontribution
to happiness:
"It is
minister
OliverLetwinhavenoted,we becausewecareaboutandrespond
tobeauty
foritsownsakethat
Trust,and Conservative
arewaryofusingthe'B word'in public,particularly
beneficial
sideeffects
arise."Nevertheless,
whenit anyfurther
beauty,
by
comestopublicpolicy.It is truethatthegovernment
us in touchwithan extraordinary,
recognises putting
unworldly
perfection,
and providesspecial protection
for 'Areas of Outstanding helpsreconcileus to theworld'simperfections,
and
struggles
NaturalBeauty',butthisis an exception.
"We seem,"Parsonswrites,
"to havea psychological
Planningguidance sorrows.
doesnotrefer
to beauty,
termssuchas 'high-qualityneedforthisglimpseoftheideal,perhapsas a reminder
that,
preferring
and'gooddesign'.
Politicians
oftheworldaroundus, it does after
neverinvoke despitetheimperfections
development'
virtually
in architecture
it.Publicjustification
forinvestment
and design, all exist."Put likethis,we can beginto understand
thevalue
in conserving
thenatural
inheritage
We have
orin thearts of beautyand its contribution
to humanwellbeing.
environment,
interms
isinvariably
ofitscontribution
tomorehard-headed
theexperience
and reasonto (re)classify
ofbeautyas amongthegreat
measurable
inclusion, BenR0gers
goods:sustainability,
goodsofhumanlife.
san
associate
Fellow
of
andeconomic
Overthepasteightmonths,
theCommission
forArchitecture
wellbeing
growth.
The sourcesofourembarrassment
and theBuiltEnvironment
about
theArtsand Humanities
(CABE),
17^1|
Research
strandsof andDemos
Council(AHRC) andIpsosMORI havebeenexploring
beautyare complex.Powerful
Beauty lies at the heart of cultural, architectural and
environmental progress, argues > Ben Rogers, so why
are policymakers still so wary of it?

26 RSA
JOURNAL

Autumn
issue
2010

This content downloaded from 119.82.76.227 on Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:23:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

www.theRSA.org

Comment/Artand architecture

it

We

are

now

less

to beautyand theirimplication
forpublic
thepublic'sattitudes
of poor-quality
tolerant
When
are
asked
about
their
people
beauty,
responses
policy.
indicate
thattheydo valueit.The first
thatcometomind
things
and
developments
in ourappearance
involve
fashion
and modelsor investing
and
environments"
homes.Buttheplaceofbeautyinpeople'slivesgoeswellbeyond degraded
a deeperandmoreimportant
in
art
this.We canidentify
beauty
thatthesealreadymaketo the
enhancethecontribution
andmusic,inthebuiltenvironment
(oldandnew)and,perhaps further
andculture.
in nature.Peoplemakeold-ageassociations environment
mostimportantly,
I was
The publicis moresensitive
thaneverbefore
to thelimitsof
betweenbeautyand moralvirtueor personalintegrity.
economistic
to
weareless
that
with
such
terms
narrowly
anyoneassociated
beauty
approaches growth.
Arguably,
surprised hardly
of
and
environments.
'frivolous'
or
tolerant
as 'snobbish',
poor-quality
developments degraded
'expensive'.
The trick
willbe tofindwaysofensuring
thatcutting
thedeficit
does notbecomean excuseforlowering
standards
ofpublicly
A questionoftaste
do differ,
andletting
theplanning
aboutbeauty
butnotperhaps
as profoundlyfundeddevelopment
anything
through
Judgements
It doesnotalwayscostmore,evenin theshortrun,to
as we mightassume.As Kiernanpointedout at one CABE- system.
beautiful
rather
thanugly.
AHRC discussion,
almosteveryone
agreesthataniPhoneismore makesomething
beautiful
thantheaverage
mobilephone.Almost
everyone
agrees
is morebeautiful
thanWestminster
orthe CABE andtheAHRC arelaunching
caUed'Peopleand
thatChartres
an initiative
Abbey,
the
Gherkin
morebeautiful
Tower. Places'thisautumn
Kieran
, whichwillinclude
(orlessugly)than NatWest
essaysbyMatthew
.
But sharedstandards
onlygetus so far.Thereremainreal andGlennParsons
differences
mjudgement,
where
especially
modern
artandarchitecture
areconcerned.
This does not, however,scupperthe
that21stcentury
argument
enlightenment
take
should
beauty- and itsdistribution
- moreseriously.
Afterall,we differ
on
otherthings.
The markofan enlightened
is itsability
to resolvedifferences
society
in a reasonableway.This means that
decisions
abouthowto allocateresources
amongdifferent
goodsare madeon the
the
basisof
bestavailableevidenceand
duedemocratic
deliberation.
Itmeans
after
thatdecisions
aboutthebuiltenvironment
should be made througha planning
processthatis openanddeliberative.
We alreadyknowthat,forsomeyears,
thereis goingto be lesspublicmoneyto
inournatural
andbuiltenvironment,
invest
andinculture.
Thatisa causeforconcern,
butnotdespair:newtechnologies
enable
a more constructive
and participative
planning
process.'Big Society'initiatives
such as moresupportforcommunity
and charitiescould
groups,volunteers
Autumn
issue
2010
www.theRSA.org

This content downloaded from 119.82.76.227 on Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:23:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions