5 ms·
The day that minimalism got equated with beauty was the day we realized we had too much clutter in our lives, so minimalism = beauty is simply a reactionary con
by PakG1 16y ago
The day that minimalism got equated with beauty was the day we realized we had too much clutter in our lives, so minimalism = beauty is simply a reactionary concept. Minimalism in of itself could not be considered beauty if you looked at what is considered beautiful art, architecture, clothing, etc, in general.
- Groxx 16y agoTake a course on art history. Especially global art history. This is not a new concept, new style, trend, focus, what-have-you, though it has gained new momentum. Edit: See: Suprematism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suprematism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suprematism), De Stijl (though they liked bold colors) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Stijl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Stijl), arguably Bauhaus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauhaus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauhaus), "International Style" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_style_(architecture) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_style_(architectu... ), all of which came before the increased business in art of the 40s-60s, which came before "Minimalism" proper in ~1965. And this is primarily in America & Europe - other areas have had their blends as well. All of which was pretty heavily influenced by the traditional Japanese aesthetic, which has a pretty strong focus on Minimalism-like attributes. Minimalism as a positive thing isn't just reactionary. It also serves to bring subtle details into focus, and to emphasize the craft (ie, crafter's experience / quality) as a whole rather than individual details.