Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:47:43 +0100
Diana wrote:
> The aesthetic aspect of DQ is clear to me too...that's why I've been
> insisting we keep it in rather than reduce the definition to a purely
> mechanistic one as some have suggested.
>
> The problem isn't whether or not the aesthetic aspect exists, it's which
> is the best word to describe it. The difference between "attractive" and
> "compelling" is a pretty subtle difference of emphasis. You think
> "compelling" means that we lose some of the poetic aspect of DQ. Well
> possibly, but I still feel it's the closest word. The difference between
> attractive and compelling is precisely the difference between the old
> records that we say we like but never play, and records that we play
> over and over again.
>
> If this is going to be a big problem I suggest using "Dynamic Quality is
> more aesthetically pleasing than static quality" because if "aesthetics"
> is what we're talking about we might as well use it in the definition.
I like it. I'd drop "pleasing" since it's redundant and say, "Dynamic
Quality is more aesthetic than static quality." Synonyms for aesthetic are
aware, sentient, conscious. The word comes from the Greek: aisthetikos,
meaning sense perception, aistheta, meaning perceptible things, and
aisthanesthai meaning to perceive. So the word aesthetic covers a lot of DQ
bases and is right on target in my book.
Platt
Catch 31: If everything is equally good, then everything is equally
worthless.
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:39 CEST