“That is cute!” I literally heard this sentence 30 times a day spending my time with a family featuring two girls about my age. The cute item could be anything. A baby, a face, a dog, a piece of cloth or furniture, a hair style, a man’s beard, an old woman’s smile, or any other object that had a visible aspect. I also learnt that depending on the situation this expression can mean a number of different things---from an enthusiastic expression of fondness to a totally indifferent comment on something that unluckily had to be commented. I have never had a mastery over any spoken language and I think here is why. I cannot let such words scatter on my voice without getting obsessive about them: Oh, good God*. Nothing seems to be beautiful or ugly anymore, but cute. Aesthetic judgment is reduced to comparing things with babies---naïve and innocent beings which are empty of philosophy and therefore not subject to any critical judgement. Why are we so interested in making a toy-land out of this world? Why do we like to keep playing with our dolls forever?
* I actually cannot use this phrase either. When I use it the stammer reigns over me.
* I actually cannot use this phrase either. When I use it the stammer reigns over me.
6 comments:
I do think we sometimes use 'cute' to abstain from passing substantial judgments. It may not be the judging itself we seek to avoid so much as the vulnerability these acts entail. Using normative words like 'ugly' and 'beautiful' reveals far more about one's beliefs than 'cute.' 'Ugly' invites inferences and challenges; 'cute' mostly asks to be ignored. Just for fun, I'll offer a real stretch: the popularity of this label might be another way we deal with our mortality. Cute can be forever if we are flexible enough in our usage. 'Beautiful' on the hand connotes the apex of a process, which we believe must be followed by a decline.
That being said, puppies are cute :).
That's a good point E. But I am against this sense of morality, it's weak, easy-to-hold and after all dishonest. And I don't agree that "beauty" has to be followed by a decline. We have this natural decline of body, also that of mental abilities. But we can define "beauty" in a deeper sense, so that things have the possibility to become more beautiful over time (beauty of love, friendship, wisdom, peace...). Same thing holds about uglyness. These words are serious and extreme, but I believe we need them to keep our minds and our aesthetics alive. Cruelty is not always bad and politeness is not good always.
I agree that we should use "cute" for puppies and babies though. I don't like to over-philosophize mind-less beings :)
That is when you become "over-judgmental". ;) We don't have to judge everything around us, do we?
I don't intend to justify aversion to judgments so much as account for them. I agree that beauty need not decline, but there is a popular association with youth that some people may wish to avoid. Allowing beauty to grow over time may not eliminate such aversions. The passage of time is just what people want to forget.
To amoohooman:
Then I would ask what kinds of things do we have to judge and what kinds we don't?
To E:
Your account seems good to me. Though a fuller account will have to mention what forces push us toward that kind and easy-taking version of morality. The association of beauty with youth which you mentioned is also valid since the "cute" discourse applies to things with visual aspect. That (mention of youth) reminded me of an article by Jean-François Dortier called "The Tyranny of Beauty". I read it in Farsi, but if you know French or can use an online page translator you can look it up here:
http://www.scienceshumaines.com/la-tyrannie-de-la-beaute_fr_22384.html
Post a Comment