Comments | RSS

"beeing beautiful seldom gives you the existential challenge it takes to develop into an interesting human being - and that goes for both sexes"

i find this to be a pretty harsh generalization, especially when the concept of beauty has such a wide range. i'd like to see the statistics on this.

...but I accept the fact that design is about aestetics, and that every rich man with a bit of taste marries a young and beautiful woman.

also it's less about aesthetics in this instance and more about sexuality. sex sells, period. to generalize the average joe would more likely buy a toothbrush from a model, because the average joe feels that.. hey this wonderful person is using this product.. if i use it we have something in common.. or i can be like him/her.

I also think that in your case of the rich man, he wouldn't be marrying a young woman to merely look at her. they have places in town for things like this. the theme more or less coincides with the point of sexuality.

Yes, maybe. I still think there is something like an objective beauty, even though it might be the subtle combination of harmony in features, grace, radiation (if you can use that word in english for what kind of 'energy' someone sends out).

So. if I understand you right, it's all about sex, not beauty? The old man marries the young woman because she would make an apt mother and give him beautiful and healthy children?

Which takes us to the point that my picture of the (subjectively at least) beautiful blonde girl is popular because our genes wants to move on, and that's the mechanism of life that hides behind everything, and is why modern advertizing is so boring and predictable?

So. if I understand you right, it's all about sex, not beauty? The old man marries the young woman because she would make an apt mother and give him beautiful and healthy children?

Nay, I can see where this can be confusing, but this is about sex, not procreation. In your example, the rich man does not marry to pass his genes, but solely for the purpose of enjoyment.

The reason why sex & "beauty" remains an underlying advertising approach is because it works. Though our idea of beauty has generally changed over the ages, it has universally been used to convey some sort of message. I do know what you are saying, and yes, it seems shallow. My question is why should they change, when it's so effective. If 100 people eat meat, and one person is a vegan... logically who should they be aiming to please? Who will make them more money? It’s a rhetorical question.