Jeff Lawrence on sat 18 dec 99
------------------
Hi,
Someone was asking for corroboration of my assertion that symmetry is rated
more beautiful than asymmetry. I really should have said =22bilateral
symmetry=22 -- Ivor Lewis is right that we need to define our terms better.
On the pottery front (this forum is about pottery, isn't it?) I've read a
lot of people talking about classic forms and praising ancient oriental
pottery. Aren't the asymmetrical pieces which have survived rather in the
minority?
About faces/beauty/symmetry, I append a blurb from Reuters from 1998. I
read a bunch more in a Time magazine from a year or two ago but who knows
where that issue has gone to. My impression is that the attractive nature
of bilateral symmetry is a given in scientific circles, however incorrect
it might be in diversity celebration circles.
W A S H I N G T O N, Sept. 24 =97 The
same trait that makes people love
harmonious music may help them
choose a beautiful face, researchers
said today.
This could be because humans learn
symmetrical patterns much faster than
asymmetrical ones, said Michael Ryan, a
zoologist at the University of Texas and
expert on the subject.
=93In humans, the perceptual system is
biased toward processing symmetrical
signals,=94 he said.
Recent studies indicate the perception of
beauty might not be subjective at all but
instead arises from a bias hard-wired into the
sensory system.
Such studies have shown how
symmetrical body features, chiefly in the face,
are viewed as beautiful, while asymmetrical
ones are not.
Ryan said another example is research
that suggests harmonic rather than discordant
music strikes humans as more pleasing
because of the way the inner ear works.
Jeff
| |
|
