John Keat 's Line, Beauty Is Truth, Truth Beauty

1568 WordsFeb 16, 20177 Pages
When it comes to media humanity and society mass consume, things that could also be considered artistic like movies, music, books, and so on, media seems to like the message that truth is… solid. That truth is, in a way other things are not. That truth is concrete and that if we work and search, we will find the truth and all our questions will be answered. More ‘artsy’ art, things like paintings, poetry, sculptures, music, and such, seem to very much disagree. Truth becomes an almost illusory concept, searched for, aspired to, but never fully grasped. I believe John Keat’s line “Beauty is truth, truth beauty” echoes this notion. By linking the concept of truth with a concept that seems different to every person in existence and the…show more content…
Some of the first thoughts of art, and its use or place in society, was through Plato’s presentation of Socrates in various dialogues. In such, he believed Art isn’t needed. Even more so, Art is detrimental. It has no place in the ordered society because it incites views and thoughts that aren’t philosophical or rational at all, but also because all art does is show copies of the world around us, which is itself only a copy of the Forms. We don’t see the truth around us, we don’t even see reality. Art, then, could never give us the truth because we have no earthly idea what that is. We have no sense perception of what truth is, and never can. Beauty seems to have no place in a logic oriented society either, especially as something that could inspire emotions in people, instead of letting them focus on philosophy. (Wartenberg 13) Almost 2,000 years later, David Hume asks if there are any sorts of standards we could use to decide if a work of art is good or bad. No matter what those in the past may have believed best, art stuck around and grew into an almost living thing that no one knew quite what to do with. Was it entertainment? Did it have value? How could we judge that value, when no one seems able to agree on how they feel about any specific piece in the first place? Hume saw the strange contradiction in how a majority of people could somehow agree on one
Open Document