social construction of beauty essay

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

On Being and Becoming Beautiful: The Social Construction of Feminine Beauty

Related Papers

Compos Mentis: Undergraduate Journal of Cognition and Neuroethics (ISSN: 2330-0264)

In discussions of "beauty" as an aesthetic and evaluative term assessing and describing people's looks, very often people use the term as if there is a shared objective standard of beauty. This mistaken conception of beauty as objective can be understood in three layers: firstly, the term "beauty" is used as if it means that a certain set of objective standards has been met; secondly, it is presupposed that these standards have existed throughout human history and will continue to exist as such even despite what appear to be significant changes to these standards; thirdly, it is often presupposed that we are all equally capable of achieving these standards and that we should all aim to meet these standards. However, this conception of beauty as objective is mistaken. I seek to make clear that: the aesthetics of people's looks is very often shaped by racism, patriarchy, heteronormativity and other systematic oppressions in our society. The term "beauty" is much more of an oppressive tool than an innocent realist appraisal or aesthetic judgment.

Holman Andrei

We present a synthesis of the contemporary approaches on the topic of corporal beauty, by dividing them into eight major research lines, each illustrated by a set of most representative theories and results: evolutionary, sociocultural and body image approaches, researches on the cross-cultural standards of beauty, on its factors, effects, personal benefits and media representations

Angie Mohamed

It's easy for us to name beautiful people in our life. But what makes them beautiful? Why does society agree that one look is 'more beautiful' than another? How does social media affect this idea? Our aim was to understand beauty standards in four contextes: historical and racial context, social media in today's world, the patriarchy's effect on the image of beauty, and emphasized eurocentric standards. Our research questions are: 1. To what extent the body positivity movement on social media has a positive effect on adolescent girls? 2. How internalized eurocentric beauty standards are in adolescent girls? 3. To what extent does the male gaze influence the behavior of adolescent girls? Data was collected from our original survey exploring the implications of beauty standards on females and individuals who identify as non-binary between the ages of 14-22. Using a two-way ANOVA statistical significance was found between ethnicity and the modes of communication of ...

Public Relations FISAT

This article tries to explain the emerging beauty consciousness of the present world. The commercial world is really influencing the teenaged groups in terms

Springer eBooks

Claudia Liebelt

Beauty and the Norm contains chapters based on empirical research across a wide range of geographical locations and cultural contexts, as well as shorter conversations between scholars that also include more personal reflections. It represents a first attempt to expose the generative operations of human standardization and normative looks in everyday life to more systematic analysis. In doing so, the volume brings together hitherto rather separate debates in critical beauty studies, cultural anthropology, sociology, the history of science and disability studies on the gendered, classed and racialized body, normative regimes of representation and the global beauty economy. In this introductory chapter, we provide a framework that ties the various contributions together, beginning with a brief history of the notion of the norm and of the closely related debates on standardization and normalization, followed by a discussion of the global economy of gendered and racialized bodies.

Brandon Giella

People often say, "Do not judge," but this inhibits society rather than progresses it. Judgment develops in people a sense of taste, without which society will not last. (This paper was submitted for an essay contest.)

Megan Carpenter , David Frederick

Why Beauty Matters -A Critical Review

Tamunobelema William

One thing Scruton got very correct is his title, “Why Beauty Matters”. Beauty is value perceived and value is the meaning derived. When one fails to find meaning in a way of life, art, music, poetry, process and so on, there is no beauty and that leads to a repulsion also known as ugliness. Scruton’s work was unable to pin his case on why beauty mattered because, he approached a subjective theme with an objective theoretical framework as well as not clearly defining any of his terms. Beauty, taste, and art are subjective terms and will continue to be respective to the beholder.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

The Sociology of Beauty Research Paper

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Beauty and social inequality, works cited.

Beauty points to the aspect of social identity that builds a reputation out of first contact appearances, expressions, and consistent behaviors observed and judged by others as an indication of overall individual life capital. Despite being a physical connotation, beauty is a flexible human element that forms an emotionally innate identity of an individual shaped by both interactions and social constructs, making it a subject of manipulations to meet the demands of different groups or cultures.

According to Erickson and Turner (2016:44), beauty constitutes social constructs, ideas, thoughts, or physical attributes that appeal to human senses. This notion confines beauty to an emotional context locking out other spheres of life such as rehabilitative or corrective measures that naturally lower the satisfaction state. Thus, based on the element of social construct that varies depending on geographical settings, the standards of beauty differ significantly across cultures, societies, and times.

Since beauty has a double effect, that is, to provoke detestation or affection, it is necessary to understand that varying potentials of beauty draw varying degrees of these two opposing effects. Therefore, this concept of polarized tastes informs the choice of the topic to analyze the relationship between beauty and social inequality such as gender and class. In this line of thought, the process of influence follows Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital, which is a social asset involving an established point for relative judgment that one inherits and builds from predecessors and the immediate environment (Croteau and Hoynes 2018:221).

In effect, stratifying and unjustly rewarding individuals for biologically influenced physical attributes dramatically affects people’s way of life. Thus, the interest to study the role that social ideas about beauty play in shaping individual lives further informed the choice of this topic. Therefore, in its association with social inequality, it is agreeable to determine the mechanism through which beauty favors or disapproves individuals based on the flawed premises that shape lives.

However, it is important to note that beauty is a social construct that emanates from human insecurities and develops majorly due to false perceptions. People construct elements of beauty based on their cultural and social interactions, and then attribute positive qualities to attractive features. Hakim coins the term “erotic capital” to refer to beauty as a form of power and profit, which combines social and physical attributes and explains the attraction between men and women (2010:515).

In this view, our positive expectation of attractive people turns beauty into a significant capital yielding reward in unexpected ways, such as popularity, friendship, power, fame, and in jobs involving customer service and entertainment. Thus, beauty, just like race, gender, sexuality, age, and other demographic characteristics, can be a crucial hidden factor enhancing inequality. From this perspective, this research paper examines beauty and discusses its contribution to social inequalities across life segments.

The mechanism through which beauty contributes to social inequality relates to its influence on opportunities established along the power of ideology, such as income avenues, gender stratification, and cultural capital.

Beauty Pays

The concept of judgment problem explores assessment disparities created from imperfect information valued on concrete facts. Reflecting on the benefit of the impression that superficially influences collective judgment, the reward of attractive people in both the job and social markets, such as marriage and relationship preferences, demonstrates the processes through which beauty pays. Beauty ideally illustrates the apparent tendency of society favoring beautiful or attractive individuals over the less attractive ones, positively attaching the physical appearance to personal character and abilities, a phenomenon that has no social association.

Therefore, “beauty pays” is a concept that hinges on the biases of social consensus in which a distinctive outward look forms a preamble for personal character and professional abilities. The weakness in human judgment is a factor of the halo effect, an ideology described by Forgas and Laham to rely heavily on potentially deceiving looks to link beauty with performance (2007:410). This concept highlights how society tends to reward physically appealing individuals with not only tangible elements, such as job opportunities or better pays, but also assumes they possess a better character or abilities. On the contrary, less attractive individuals, regardless of their professional abilities or moral standing, unjustly face impression-based criticism, depending on biological predisposition, thus denying them a chance to compete fairly with their opposite mates.

Practical examples of job opportunities augmenting the concept of “beauty pays” include the hospitality industry cutting across hotel and tourism businesses, and entertainment and advertising business sectors. On these platforms, hiring credentials take into consideration both visible and audio attributes to award scores and rewards an individual’s performance. A sociologist Hakim established that the benefit of beauty depends on the ability to stimulate collective emotional satisfaction, which is the content of the power of erotic capital (2011:509).

Placing a premium on attractive attributes is evident in the advertisement and prostitution industry where individuals with appealing looks find greater success than those with low erotic capital. In a sense, beauty is a social attribute that can independently move an individual up the competitive lane of the public market. As the basis of this understanding, erotic capital is a crucial concept of beauty that needs exploitation in equal measure as a professional attribute that positions individuals for better job opportunities and success in life.

Generally, given the inequalities resulting from beauty disparity, it is agreeable to identify physical attractiveness as an economic force that stratifies individuals based on their appearances and social desirability.

According to Hamermesh, statistics show that men and women who are below average in beauty earn 17% and 12% less than their beautiful counterparts, respectively (2013:42). This economic disparity points to the probable fact that attractive individuals have certain benefits over less attractive ones in all aspects of life, including getting better-educated spouses and competing for elective positions. Conversely, less attractive individuals have a low success rate in job growth, higher likelihood of losing jobs, and an increased potential to earn less money in life. These financial differences demonstrate the essential contribution of beauty in enhancing social disparities and creating class gaps.

Overall, these outright favors dominate the public environment stretching the benefits of beauty as a concept of social capital that society ought to cultivate or develop. This knowledge explains the rise in beauty shops numbers and the expansion of the advertisement industry.

As people tend to balance biological conditions with social demands, it is necessary to note that the inclination towards making a good impression originates from the over-time evolution and molding of social preferences and choices. Thus, given the opportunity to decide on the selection and appointment of people to critical positions, all individuals tend to converge at a socially desirable point of preference, giving attractive individuals a better competitive advantage over their counterparts. In this case, social values positively enhance success outcomes for people with a better physique and provide them with more chances for job interviews, appointments to higher positions, and better remuneration.

The Gender Role

In social stratification, beauty plays a crucial role in setting standards and a measurement scale for each sexual category. The first line of discrimination involves identifying individuals along the dimension of social cognition, which provides the basis for gender-based judgment and preferential treatment within the economic market. The elements defining gender standards of physical attractiveness conform to society’s view of beauty in each sex category and expected roles.

Giselinde Kuipers reveals in his research that society has distinct concepts that define the standards of beauty among women with flexible qualities for men, depending on circumstances and the environment (Singapore Management University 2017). In this case, society demands clear and more defined attributes of attractiveness from women than from men.

Despite physical attractiveness playing a significant role in how society scores men’s abilities, another essential aspect of beauty in men involves adhering to the community-based ideal standards of masculinity. Different communities and social environments have varying ideas of qualities defining what constitutes a real man. However, the extent of attractiveness based on these standards still affects individuals’ opportunities to exploit their features. In most African and Asian countries, for example, the society discriminates and punishes men with physical looks almost considered as feminine within their local setting. Thus, this power of classification underscores the qualities of beauty along racial lines.

Some races, Africans in particular, view masculinity as a set of visible features defining beauty. However, regardless of race, the understanding of both gender and race facilitates the perception of the attractiveness of individuals based on social standards in any given context (Hakim 2010:508). In most settings, men of lighter complexion, receive less attention as the society views them as less masculine and are likely to attract negative treatment in social circles based on their appearance that fits the opposite gender. Thus, the ability of a man to ignite or raise emotions in other individuals whether through male attributes, facial features, or other factors that constitute the definition of masculinity among different communities forms the basis of unequal treatment and social discrimination.

On the other hand, factors that define female attractiveness in the global society tend to relate to an ideal body shape and complexion. However, the element of weight varies across regions, especially among African communities, where in some cultures being overweight is a positive attribute that puts women higher in the social hierarchy. According to Spade and Valentine (2008), men typically occupy positions of power to determine what they think is acceptable within the incessant definition and to set the standards of beauty for women.

Feminist expectations result from male oppression of women, making beauty an increasingly important prerequisite with far more significant effects on women’s success than that of men. Therefore, for women, attractiveness is considered a superiority badge that needs continuous improvement to enhance their individual market value and competitive advantage.

Examining the social discrimination of women based on gender, the impact of male power on defining tastes and standards of beauty for women increases their problems in searching for social opportunities. Thus, attractiveness of women is a weapon of mass influence that packages and stage-manages all other attributes in secular courts (Spade and Valentine 2008). Based on the concept of the power of erotic capital, feminine attractiveness has the potential to sway and program men’s views on women’s qualities and overall abilities. The emotional content of this implies that men can overlook all other attributes in favor of feminine attractiveness, making beauty socioeconomic capital that women can exploit to enhance their hierarchical status. Therefore, given the impact of the patriarchal view on female professional success, women must invest in cultivating this asset to ensure optimum life outcomes.

The Social Value of Taste in Beauty

The idea of tastes or preferences in physical characteristics primarily depends on individualized cultural capital, which is rooted in the idea that beauty can be socially developed based on one’s background and educational experiences. According to Croteau and Hoynes (2018:220), Bourdieu’s notion of cultural capital dictates that the family background is a dominant social force that shapes and sets individuals along distinct ideological paths conceived through the training and capacity of social interaction. In addition, Gartman (2002:257) recognized the fundamental contribution of socioeconomic status in defining social boundaries and enhancing class-based disparities in upbringing, forms, and the level of exposure.

In essence, a parental socioeconomic position profoundly influences the scope of their children’s social network and their learning experiences. Thus, children inherit their social skills and tastes from their parents and immediate environment, which transform into their behaviors and lifestyle (Croteau and Hoynes 2018:221). One good example is that some individuals wear a suit or expensive dresses to express their economic worth, while others dress casually despite their excellent financial status. This notion of simplicity is cultivated over time through social exposure that puts a value on other aspects of life such as educational attainment.

Conversely, educational opportunities divide individuals based on the parental financial status, the type of major pursued, the level of educational attainment, and the type of school attended, resulting in class-based differences. Croteau and Hoynes (2018:221) hold that cultural capital facilitates the development of approximately uniform and identical concepts within each social class with distinct characteristics.

Thus, individuals in the same class behave and relate in an almost similar manner, but different from those of other social classes concerning their choices and ways of expressions. In essence, resource distribution enables individuals from higher income backgrounds to access and internalize a broad category of social forces with a significant influence on their degree of preference for several items (Kwon 2007:68).

Based on this ideology, economic predispositions provide individuals with varying social exposures that prepare them for different lanes, creating social inequalities. For example, the kinds of sports and games that children play depend on the ability of their family to afford them and, subsequently, determine their chance to succeed in the social market.

Sociology highlights the positive contribution of beauty in the society, while also demonstrating its input in social inequalities. Despite being a social construct based on individual cultural, economic, and social capital, beauty dramatically influences the outcome of other attributes such as skills and abilities. Given this power to determine or set the success of individuals in social and economic aspects, it is possible to conclude that attractiveness can shape the way individuals live, interact, and negotiate their progress on a social scale. Thus, beauty plays a crucial role in the creation and establishment of social inequalities within different populations.

However, this contribution undermines the notions of biological differences and the social frame determining the level of application. Therefore, it is advisable to make sense of the fact that beauty is not a good source of information since physical appearances can be deceiving. In essence, assuming that the way someone looks represents a person’s character does not only discriminate but also facilitates wrong judgment and perpetuate corrupt practices.

Croteau, David, and William Hoynes. 2018. Experience Sociology . 3rd. ed. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.

Erickson, Mark, and Charles Turner, eds. 2016. The sociology of Wilhelm Baldamus: paradox and inference. New York, NY: Routledge.

Forgas, Joseph P. and Laham M. Simon. 2007. “Halo Effect.” Pp. 409-415 in Encyclopedia of Social Psychology , edited by R. F. Baumeister and K. D. Vohs. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Gartman, D. 2002. “Bourdieu’s Theory of Cultural Change: Explication, Application, Critique.” Sociological Theory 20(2): 255-277.

Hakim, Catherine. 2010. “Erotic Capital.” European Sociological Review 26(5): 499-518. Web.

Hakim, Catherine. 2011. Honey Money: The Power of Erotic Capital . New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Hamermesh, Daniel S. 2013. Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Kwon, Yoo J. 2007. “Taste In Appearance: Self, Cultivated Dispositions, and Cultural Capital.” Retrospective Theses and Dissertations 15977. Web.

Singapore Management University. 2017. Beauty and Inequality . Web.

Spade, Joan Z., and Catherine G. Valentine. 2008. The Kaleidoscope of Gender: Prisms, Patterns, and Possibilities . Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press/Sage.

• Toxic Relationships and Gender Stereotypes
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Its Theories
• Introduction to Psychology: Rating Attractiveness: Consensus among Men, not Women, Study Finds
• The overall attractiveness of China as investment sites
• Art, Pornography and Feminism and Internet Influence
• Psychology in Afghan Sociocultural Context
• Emotion Regulation and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
• Foolishness: Psychological Perspective
• Autism Spectrum Disorder: Programs Effectiveness
• Psychological Testing of Intellectual Disabilities
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, December 16). The Sociology of Beauty. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-sociology-of-beauty/

"The Sociology of Beauty." IvyPanda , 16 Dec. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/the-sociology-of-beauty/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'The Sociology of Beauty'. 16 December.

IvyPanda . 2020. "The Sociology of Beauty." December 16, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-sociology-of-beauty/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Sociology of Beauty." December 16, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-sociology-of-beauty/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Sociology of Beauty." December 16, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-sociology-of-beauty/.

Beauty as a Social Construct: Impact on Women's Self-Esteem

Added on   2023-06-15

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Views on Body Image lg ...

Social construction of beauty and its impact on society lg ..., humanities research paper 2022 lg ..., relevance of mulvey’s gaze theory lg ..., challenges faced by young people today and media's influence on body image lg ..., discrimination in genders | sociology lg ....

What is Beauty?

Elizabeth B. Pearce

Although the famous saying “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” originated in the 3rd centruy BC and was revived in its current form by Margaret Wolfe Hungerford in 1878, it can also be said that society, and the media in particular, create and reinforce stereotypical ideas of beauty.

Beauty is a social construct . It is based on societally agreed upon ideas that have been ingrained into our systems and our psyches over time and have been accepted as the norm. These ideas of beauty slowly become embedded into our minds on a micro level, and affect the way we operate. There is a bi-directional relationship with societal forces including media, marketing, businesses, government, and other institutions. These forces influence youth, affecting appearance, cosmetics, behavior, and clothing. The media, of which 90% is controlled by four media conglomerates who are owned by predominantly White and wealthy males, [1] are responsible for creating and reinforcing preferences and biases which reinforce the dominant culture’s idea of beauty.

Western society has identified particular aspects of physical appearance as being beautiful, or desirable. People with these characteristics are favored and featured. This is known as the halo effect, in which additional favorable characteristics are associated with “attractiveness.” One example of this effect applies to academia. While it is acknowledged that the face’s physical appearance may indicate important characteristics such as physical health, it has also been found that it is used inaccurately to predict a person’s academic performance. Using the faces of university students, researchers learned that subjects inaccurately attributed competence and intelligence to more attractive faces. [2] This can have long term implications for success in education, as other research has found that teachers’ expectations of learners can have a positive or negative effect on their learning. [3]

Another example from academia describes how gender, perceived attractiveness, and age intersect to affect how students’ perception of physical appearance moderate their experience of the actual behavior of faculty. When students rated the perceived qualities of instructors based on appearance in a 2014 study, women’s age and attractiveness were linked (older women were judged to be less attractive). Less attractiveness correlated with judgments students made about prospective faculty; that those less attractive (and older) were also less likely to be organized and/or have rapport with their students, illustrating the halo effect. [4]

There have been some insightful analyses of attractiveness and facial symmetry related to pay and job attainment in sports. The most well-known relates to “quarterback-face.”  Using computer measurements, economists found that while taking into account career statistics, experience, Pro Bowl appearances, and draft position, one standard deviation of symmetry of facial structure led to an eight percent increase in pay. [5] This holds true for starting quarterbacks in the National Football League (NFL), and even more strongly for back-up quarterbacks.

Beauty can and does change from place to place, from culture to culture, and from person to person.   It is demonstrated via society’s products, patterns, trends, wants and desires. It is influenced biologically, by pheromones and natural physical attractions. This shows us that it is a social construction .  The threat to family well-being is when that socially constructed idea is assigned different value or worth, based on physical appearance. Bullying, fewer academic opportunities, and loss of employment can all be linked to the idealized conception of beauty.  The halo effect can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, where those who fit the social construction of attractiveness, are perceived as being more valuable members of society, which then may lead to preferential treatment and more life chances , thereby increasing the person’s likelihood of succeeding. [6]

So what does this mean for us, the readers and writers of this text?  It means that we need to be aware and pay attention to what we might call our “intuition” or “gut” feelings about who is deserving of the benefit of the doubt, or of an extra opportunity. Sometimes those instinctual feelings are masking some preference for attractiveness or an implicit bias. We can teach our children, students, peers, and colleagues the same. By making this topic discussable, we can work toward achieving equity in education, employment, and experience.

Beauty, Art, and Identity

The dominant culture is powerful.  Finding ways to fit in is important and sometimes people go to extremes to fit into what is deemed desirable. For example, in the film Crazy Rich Asians , the movie rewards Rachel Chu for mimicking European beauty standards. She is preparing for a big wedding, and has a friend who comments how they need to get her eyelids taped, which is a popular method for East Asian and Asian Americans to remove their monolids and appear more caucasion. In this movie, whiteness is provided as the aesthetic for beauty standards, particularly Euro-American standards. The continual reinforcement of one kind of beauty creates tension and conflict for families between this ideal, their own culture, and individuality.

Art and beauty matter. Make-up and facepaint reflect both culture and idealized beauty standards. Native American men use face paint to identify themselves, align with hopes and dreams, demonstrate their honor, and before battle. Paints came from a variety of natural materials and held significance related to color and pattern. [7] Drag families that form with various familiar family roles use costumes and make-up to express identity, role, and representation. [8] Tattoos and piercings have a long history of affiliation with beauty and expression and have only grown in recent decades in importance related to identity.  And yet there are questions and concerns related to employment when one has tattoos; bias against those with tattoos is a worry. The complexity of how each person and family member sees oneself, influenced by the societal norms that favor certain appearances, continues to affect functionality of both families and society.

Diversity in culture can inspire people to express and reinforce their own identities whether or not they are in the dominant group. Lin-Manuel Miranda, the creator of the wildly popular Broadway musical and film, Hamilton: An American Musical , talks about his love of theater as an adolescent, but the limited view he had of his own expressive abilities until he saw Rent , the 1996 rock musical with music, lyrics and book by Jonathan Larson. Hamilton premiered in 2015 and has won both critical and popular acclaim, including multiple Drama Desk and Tony awards, selling out performances on Broadway, and after three national tours, was ended only by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

In an interview with Terry Gross on NPR’s Fresh Air in June 2020, Miranda said,

Really, the only thing I saw that really gave me permission to write musicals was Rent , which was an incredibly diverse cast. And I went from being a fan of musicals to writing musicals when I saw that show because it was the thing that gave me permission…it was contemporary, and it had Latino actors and Black actors. And it told me you’re allowed to write what you know into a show. No other musical had told me that…

…So it was truly the first contemporary musical I’d seen and and, I think, got me from being a kid who was in school musicals and loved them but just thought they were written by other people, like, by, like, old White people on the Upper East Side, to giving me permission. And it’s been gratifying to see how these shows, Heights and Hamilton in particular, like, not only provide employment but also provide, like, permission and amplification of a lot of other voices. [9]

Miranda’s statement demonstrates explicitly the importance of diverse voices being created, produced, and publicized. Identity and art are intertwined and influence individuals and families in their development, structure, and daily lives.

Visual culture influences family, in both the public function of caregiving and private function of emotional bonds we share with one another. Equity in access to and representation of visual culture will foster the ability of every individual and family to meet their potential. Art brings families together and simultaneously displays how we view the family at any point in time. It helps us notice the socially constructed nature of the family, and of our ideas of beauty.  It can be a tool that is used for expression and to foster change. Visual representations depict ideas that we may not be able to put into words.  After all, we are humanly wired to do this; to understand, categorize, to express, and to make sense of meaning. Visual Culture creates the avenue for both our own creativity and for us to better understand the world.

Licenses and Attributions

Open Content, Shared Previously

Figure 8.21. “native american dancer c” by alandberning . License: CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 . “ several piercings ” by Sara Marx . License: CC BY 2.0 . “ celtic Cross” by scorpion1985x . License: CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 .  “face painting” by clickclique . Licensed: CC BY-NC 2.0

Figure 8.22. “The Learning Child” by Gilbert Ibañez. License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

• Wikipedia. (n.d.). Media conglomerate. Retrieved May 29, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_conglomerate ↵
• Talamas, S. N., Mavor, K. I., & Perrett, D. I. (2016). Blinded by beauty: Attractiveness bias and accurate perceptions of academic performance. PLOS ONE, 11(2), e0148284. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148284 ↵
• Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. F. (1968). Teacher expectations for the disadvantaged. Scientific American, 218(4), 19–23. ↵
• Wilson, J. H., Beyer, D., & Monteiro, H. (2014). Professor age affects student ratings: Halo effect for younger teachers. College Teaching, 62(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2013.825574 ↵
• Berri, D. J. (2008, September 16). Do pretty-boy quarterbacks make more money? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/sports/playmagazine/0914play-FBALL-QBS.html ↵
• Wikipedia. (n.d.). Physical attractiveness. Retrieved June 3, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness ↵
• Gowder, P. (2011, July 21). Face painting traditions & meanings. PowWows.com. https://www.powwows.com/face-painting-traditions-among-men-of-the-plains/ ↵
• National Center for Transgender Equality. (2017, April 28). Understanding drag. https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-drag ↵
• Miranda, L-M. (2020, June 29). Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda. (T. Gross, Interviewer) [podcast]. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/29/884691708/hamilton-creator-lin-manuel-miranda ↵

Meaning assigned to an object or event by mutual agreement (explicit or implicit) of the members of a society; can change over time and/or location.

A social science theory created by German sociologist Max Weber in 1920. The theory of life chances postulates that an individual’s opportunity to lead a successful and fulfilling life are correlated to a variety of factors, including social stratification, social class, social mobility, and social equality, all of which can give a person low or high life chances.

Contemporary Families: An Equity Lens 1e Copyright © 2020 by Elizabeth B. Pearce is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Corpus ID: 141872029

The Social Construction of Beauty: Body Modification Examined Through the Lens of Social Learning Theory

• J. Steinberg
• Published 2015
• Psychology, Sociology, Education

2 Citations

On being and becoming beautiful: the social construction of feminine beauty, cultural dynamics of beauty: deconstructing perceptions of feminine bodily ideals in contemporary nigeria, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• WOMEN OF IMPACT

The idea of beauty is always shifting. Today, it’s more inclusive than ever.

Whom we deem ‘beautiful’ is a reflection of our values. Now, a more expansive world has arrived where ‘we are all beautiful.’

The Sudanese model Alek Wek appeared on the November 1997 cover of the U.S. edition of Elle magazine, in a photograph by French creative director Gilles Bensimon . It was, as is so often the case in the beauty business, a global production.

Wek, with her velvety ebony skin and mere whisper of an Afro, was posed in front of a stark, white screen. Her simple, white Giorgio Armani blazer almost disappeared into the background. Wek, however, was intensely present.

She was standing at an angle but looking directly into the camera with a pleasant smile spread across her face, which wasn’t so much defined by planes and angles as by sweet, broad, distinctly African curves. Wek represented everything that a traditional cover girl was not.

More than 20 years after she was featured on that Elle cover, the definition of beauty has continued to expand, making room for women of color, obese women, women with vitiligo , bald women, women with gray hair and wrinkles. We are moving toward a culture of big-tent beauty. One in which everyone is welcome. Everyone is beautiful. Everyone’s idealized version can be seen in the pages of magazines or on the runways of Paris.

We have become more accepting because people have demanded it, protested for it, and used the bully pulpit of social media to shame beauty’s gatekeepers into opening the doors wider.

Eye of the beholder

Technology has put the power to define beauty in the hands of the people. Mobile phones allow people greater control of their image, and include apps that come with filters used for fun, appearance, and entertainment.

Wek was a new vision of beauty—that virtue forever attached to women . It has long been a measure of their social value; it is also a tool to be used and manipulated. A woman should not let her beauty go to waste; that was something people would say back when a woman’s future depended on her marrying well. Her husband’s ambition and potential should be as dazzling as her fine features.

Beauty is, of course, cultural. What one community admires may leave another group of people cold or even repulsed. What one individual finds irresistible elicits a shrug from another. Beauty is personal. But it’s also universal. There are international beauties—those people who have come to represent the standard.

For generations, beauty required a slender build but with a generous bosom and a narrow waist. The jawline was to be defined, the cheekbones high and sharp. The nose angular. The lips full but not distractingly so. The eyes, ideally blue or green, large and bright. Hair was to be long, thick, and flowing—and preferably golden. Symmetry was desired. Youthfulness, that went without saying.

This was the standard from the earliest days of women’s magazines, when beauty was codified and commercialized. The so-called great beauties and swans—women such as actress Catherine Deneuve , socialite C.Z. Guest , or Princess Grace —came closest to this ideal. The further one diverged from this version of perfection, the more exotic a woman became. Diverge too much and a woman was simply considered less attractive—or desirable or valuable. And for some women—black and brown or fat or old ones—beauty seemed impossible in the broader culture.

In the early part of the 1990s, the definition of beauty as it applied to women began to loosen thanks to the arrival of Kate Moss , with her slight figure and vaguely ragamuffin aesthetic. Standing five feet seven inches, she was short for a runway walker. The British teenager was not particularly graceful, and she lacked the noble bearing that gave many other models their regal air. Moss’s star turn in advertisements for Calvin Klein signified a major departure from the long-legged gazelles of years past.

Moss was disruptive to the beauty system, but she was still well within the industry’s comfort zone of defining beauty as a white, European conceit. So too were the youthquake models of the 1960s such as Twiggy , who had the gangly, curveless physique of a 12-year-old boy. The 1970s brought Lauren Hutton, who stirred scandal simply because she had a gap between her teeth.

Even the early black models who broke barriers were relatively safe: women such as Beverly Johnson, the first African-American model to appear on the cover of American Vogue , the Somali-born Iman, Naomi Campbell, and Tyra Banks. They had keen features and flowing hair—or wigs or weaves to give the illusion that they did. Iman had a luxuriously long neck that made legendary fashion editor Diana Vreeland gasp. Campbell was—and is—all va-va-voom legs and hips, and Banks rose to fame as the girl next door in a polka dot bikini on the cover of Sports Illustrated .

Wek was a revelation. Her beauty was something entirely different.

Her tightly coiled hair was sheared close to her scalp. Her seemingly poreless skin was the color of dark chocolate. Her nose was broad; her lips were full. Her legs were impossibly long and incredibly thin. Indeed, her entire body had the stretched-out sinewiness of an African stick figure brought to life.

To eyes that had been trained to understand beauty through the lens of Western culture, Wek was jarring to everyone, and black folks were no exception. Many of them did not consider her beautiful. Even women who might have looked in the mirror and seen the same nearly coal black skin and tightly coiled hair reflected back had trouble reckoning with this Elle cover girl.

See and be seen

Fashion and beauty magazines present a paragon of aspiration, often setting beauty standards for women across cultures. The magazines also serve as giant advertisements for the industries dependent on selling these ideals to willing customers.

Wek was abruptly and urgently transformative. It was as though some great cultural mountain had been scaled by climbing straight up a steep slope, as if there were neither time nor patience for switchbacks. To see Wek celebrated was exhilarating and vertiginous. Everything about her was the opposite of what had come before.

We are in a better place than we were a generation ago, but we have not arrived at utopia. Many of the clubbiest realms of beauty still don’t include larger women, disabled ones, or senior citizens.

But to be honest, I’m not sure exactly what utopia would look like. Is it a world in which everyone gets a tiara and the sash of a beauty queen just for showing up? Or is it one in which the definition of beauty gets stretched so far that it becomes meaningless? Perhaps the way to utopia is by rewriting the definition of the word itself to better reflect how we’ve come to understand it—as something more than an aesthetic pleasure.

We know that beauty has financial value. We want to be around beautiful people because they delight the eye but also because we think they are intrinsically better humans. We’ve been told that attractive people are paid higher salaries. In truth, it’s a bit more complicated than that. It’s really a combination of beauty, intelligence, charm, and collegiality that serves as a recipe for better pay. Still, beauty is an integral part of the equation.

But on a powerfully emotional level, being perceived as attractive means being welcomed into the cultural conversation. You are part of the audience for advertising and marketing. You are desired. You are seen and accepted. When questions arise about someone’s looks, that’s just another way of asking: How acceptable is she? How relevant is she? Does she matter?

Today suggesting that a person is not gorgeous is to risk social shunning or at least a social media lashing. What kind of monster declares another human being unattractive? To do so is to virtually dismiss that person as worthless. It’s better to lie. Of course you’re beautiful, sweetheart; of course you are.

We have come to equate beauty with humanity. If we don’t see the beauty in another person, we are blind to that person’s humanity. It’s scary how important beauty has become. It goes to the very soulfulness of a person.

Beauty has become so important today that denying that people possess it is akin to denying them oxygen.

There used to be gradations when it came to describing the feminine ideal: homely, jolie laide, attractive, pretty, and ultimately, beautiful. The homely woman managed as best she could. She adjusted to the fact that her looks were not her most distinguishing feature. She was the woman with the terrific personality. Striking women had some characteristic that made them stand out: bountiful lips, an aristocratic nose, a glorious poitrine. A lot of women could be described as attractive. They were at the center of the bell curve. Pretty was another level. Hollywood is filled with pretty people.

Ah, but beautiful! Beautiful was a description that was reserved for special cases, for genetic lottery winners. Beauty could even be a burden because it startled people. It intimidated them. Beauty was exceptional.

But improved plastic surgery, more personalized and effective nutrition, the flowering of the fitness industry, and the rise of selfie filters on smartphones, along with Botox, fillers, and the invention of Spanx, have all combined to help us look better—and get a little bit closer to looking exceptional. Therapists, bloggers, influencers, stylists, and well-meaning friends have raised their voices in a chorus of body-positivity mantras: You go, girl! You slay! Yasss, queen! They are not charged with speaking harsh truths and helping us see ourselves vividly and become better versions of ourselves. Their role is constant uplift, to tell us that we are perfect just as we are.

And the globalization of, well, everything means that somewhere out there is an audience that will appreciate you in all your magnificent … whatever.

We are all beautiful.

In New York, London, Milan, and Paris—the traditional fashion capitals of the world—the beauty codes have changed more dramatically in the past 10 years than in the preceding hundred. Historically, shifts had been by degrees. Changes in aesthetics weren’t linear, and despite fashion’s reputation for rebelliousness, change was slow. Revolutions were measured in a few inches.

Through the years, an angular shape has been celebrated and then a more curvaceous one. The average clothing size of a runway model, representative of the designers’ ideal, shrank from a six to a zero; the pale blondes of Eastern Europe ruled the runway until the sun-kissed blondes from Brazil deposed them. The couture body—lean, hipless, and practically flat-chested—can be seen in the classic portraits by Irving Penn, Richard Avedon, and Gordon Parks, as well as on the runways of designers such as John Galliano and the late Alexander McQueen. But then Miuccia Prada, who had led the way in promoting a nearly homogeneous catwalk of pale, white, thin models, suddenly embraced an hourglass shape. And then plus-size model Ashley Graham appeared on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue in 2016 , and in 2019 Halima Aden became the first model to wear a hijab in that same magazine , and suddenly everyone is talking about modesty and beauty and fuller figures … and the progress is dizzying.

In the past decade, beauty has moved resolutely forward into territory that was once deemed niche. Nonbinary and transgender are part of the mainstream beauty narrative. As the rights of LGBTQ individuals have been codified in the courts, so have the aesthetics particular to them been absorbed into the beauty dialogue. Transgender models walk the runways and appear in advertising campaigns. They are hailed on the red carpet for their glamour and good taste but also for their physical characteristics. Their bodies are celebrated as aspirational.

The catalyst for our changed understanding of beauty has been a perfect storm of technology, economics, and a generation of consumers with sharpened aesthetic literacy.

The technology is social media in general and Instagram specifically. The fundamental economic factor is the unrelenting competition for market share and the need for individual companies to grow their audience of potential customers for products ranging from designer dresses to lipstick. And the demographics lead, as they always do these days, to millennials, with an assist from baby boomers who plan to go into that good night with six-pack abs.

Hyejin Yun undergoes eyelid surgery in the Hyundai Aesthetics clinic in Seoul. The procedure makes eyes look bigger. South Korea has one of the highest rates of plastic surgery in the world; one in three women ages 19 to 29 has had cosmetic surgery.

Social media has changed the way younger consumers relate to fashion. It’s hard to believe, but back in the 1990s, the notion of photographers posting runway imagery online was scandalous. Designers lived in professional terror of having their entire collection posted online, fearing that it would lead to business-killing knockoffs. And while knockoffs and copies continue to frustrate designers, the real revolution brought on by the internet was that consumers were able to see, in nearly real time, the full breadth of the fashion industry’s aesthetic.

In the past, runway productions were insider affairs. They weren’t meant for public consumption, and the people sitting in the audience all spoke the same fashion patois. They understood that runway ideas weren’t meant to be taken literally; they were oblivious to issues of cultural appropriation, racial stereotypes, and all varieties of isms—or they were willing to overlook them. Fashion’s power brokers were carrying on the traditions of the power brokers who’d come before, happily using black and brown people as props in photo shoots that starred white models who had parachuted in for the job.

But an increasingly diverse class of moneyed consumers, a more expansive retail network, and a new media landscape have forced the fashion industry into greater accountability on how it depicts beauty. Clothing and cosmetic brands now take care to reflect the growing numbers of luxury consumers in countries such as India and China by using more Asian models.

Marked by beauty

We’ve been chasing beauty for millennia, primping and painting our way to a more desirable ideal. Cultures in every era have held different standards of feminine beauty and myriad means of achieving it, from the toxic lead cosmetics of the past to today’s Botox injections. But the standards often serve the same aims: to attract and retain a mate; to signal social status, wealth, health, or fertility; and of course, to simply feel beautiful.

Social media has amplified the voices of minority communities—from Harlem to South Central Los Angeles—so that their calls for representation can’t be so easily ignored. And the growth of digital publications and blogs means that every market has become more fluent in the language of aesthetics. A whole new category of power brokers has emerged: influencers. They are young and independent and obsessed with the glamour of fashion. And fashion influencers don’t accept excuses, condescension, or patronizing pleas to be patient, because really, change is forthcoming.

The modern beauty standard in the West has always been rooted in thinness. And when the obesity rates were lower, thin models were only slight exaggerations in the eyes of the general population. But as obesity rates rose, the distance between the reality and the fantasy grew. People were impatient with a fantasy that no longer seemed even remotely accessible.

Fat bloggers warned critics to stop telling them to lose weight and stop suggesting ways for them to camouflage their body. They were perfectly content with their body, thank you very much. They just wanted better clothes. They wanted fashion that came in their size—not with the skirts made longer or the sheath dresses reworked with sleeves.

They weren’t really demanding to be labeled beautiful. They were demanding access to style because they believed they deserved it. In this way, beauty and self-worth were inextricably bound.

Giving full-figured women greater access made economic sense. By adhering to traditional beauty standards, the fashion industry had been leaving money on the table. Designers such as Christian Siriano made a public point of catering to larger customers and, in doing so, were hailed as smart and as capitalist heroes. Now it’s fairly common for even the most rarefied fashion brands to include large models in their runway shows.

But this new way of thinking isn’t just about selling more dresses. If it were only about economics, designers would have long ago expanded their size offerings, because there have always been larger women able and willing to embrace fashion. Big simply wasn’t considered beautiful. Indeed, even Oprah Winfrey went on a diet before she posed for the cover of Vogue in 1998. As recently as 2012, the designer Karl Lagerfeld, who died last year and who himself was 92 pounds overweight at one point, was called to task for saying that pop star Adele was “a little too fat.”

Attitudes are shifting. But the fashion world remains uneasy with large women—no matter how famous or rich. No matter how pretty their face. Elevating them to iconic status is a complicated, psychological hurdle for the arbiters of beauty. They need sleek élan in their symbols of beauty. They need long lines and sharp edges. They need women who can fit into sample sizes.

But instead of operating in a vacuum, they now are operating in a new media environment. Average folks have taken note of whether designers have a diverse cast of models, and if they do not, critics can voice their ire on social media and an angry army of like-minded souls can rise up and demand change. Digital media has made it easier for stories about emaciated and anorexic models to reach the general public, and the public now has a way to shame and pressure the fashion industry to stop hiring these deathly thin women. The Fashion Spot website became a diversity watchdog, regularly issuing reports on the demographic breakdown on the runways. How many models of color? How many plus-size women? How many of them were transgender? How many older models?

One might think that as female designers themselves aged, they would begin to highlight older women in their work. But women in fashion are part of the same cult of youth that they created. They Botox and diet. They swear by raw food and SoulCycle. How often do you see a chubby designer? A gray-haired one? Designers still use the phrase “old lady” to describe clothes that are unattractive. A “matronly” dress is one that is unflattering or out-of-date. The language makes the bias plain. But today women don’t take it as a matter of course. They revolt. Making “old” synonymous with unattractive is simply not going to stand.

The spread of luxury brands into China, Latin America, and Africa has forced designers to consider how best to market to those consumers while avoiding cultural minefields. They have had to navigate skin lightening in parts of Africa, the Lolita-cute culture of Japan, the obsession with double-eyelid surgery in East Asian countries, and prejudices of colorism, well, virtually everywhere. Idealized beauty needs a new definition. Who will sort it out? And what will the definition be?

In the West, the legacy media are now sharing influence with digital media, social media, and a new generation of writers and editors who came of age in a far more multicultural world—a world that has a more fluid view of gender. The millennial generation, those born between 1981 and 1996, is not inclined to assimilate into the dominant culture but to stand proudly apart from it. The new definition of beauty is being written by a selfie generation: people who are the cover stars of their own narrative.

You May Also Like

Is 'Ozempic face' real? Here's what sudden weight loss does to your body

How street fashion sparked a WWII race riot in Los Angeles

Beauty is pain—at least it was in 17th-century Spain

The new beauty isn’t defined by hairstyles or body shape, by age or skin color. Beauty is becoming less a matter of aesthetics and more about self-awareness, personal swagger, and individuality. It’s about chiseled arms and false eyelashes and a lineless forehead. But it’s also defined by rounded bellies, shimmering silver hair, and mundane imperfections. Beauty is a millennial strutting around town in leggings, a crop top, and her belly protruding over her waistband. It is a young man swishing down a runway in over-the-knee boots and thigh-grazing shorts.

Beauty is political correctness, cultural enlightenment, and social justice.

In New York, there’s a fashion collective called Vaquera that mounts runway shows in dilapidated settings with harsh lighting and no glamour. The cast could have piled off the F train after a sleepless night. Their hair is mussed. Their skin looks like it has a thin sheen of overnight grime. They stomp down the runway. The walk could be interpreted as angry, bumbling, or just a little bit hungover.

Masculine-looking models wear princess dresses that hang from the shoulders with all the allure of a shower curtain. Feminine-looking models aggressively speed-walk with a hunched posture and a grim expression. Instead of elongating legs and creating an hourglass silhouette, the clothes make legs look stumpy and the torso thick. Vaquera is among the many companies that call on street casting, which is basically pulling oddball characters from the street and putting them on the runway—essentially declaring them beautiful.

In Paris, the designer John Galliano, like countless other designers, has been blurring gender. He has done so in a way that’s exaggerated and aggressive, which is to say that instead of aiming to craft a dress or a skirt that caters to the lines of a masculine physique, he has simply draped that physique with a dress. The result is not a garment that ostensibly aims to make individuals look their best. It’s a statement about our stubborn assumptions about gender, clothing, and physical beauty.

Not so long ago, the clothing line Universal Standard published an advertising campaign featuring a woman who wears a U.S. size 24. She posed in her skivvies and a pair of white socks. The lighting was flat, her hair slightly frizzed, and her thighs dimpled with cellulite. There was nothing magical or inaccessible about the image. It was exaggerated realism—the opposite of the Victoria’s Secret angel.

Every accepted idea about beauty is being subverted. This is the new normal, and it is shocking. Some might argue that it’s even rather ugly.

As much as people say that they want inclusiveness and regular-looking people—so-called real people—many consumers remain dismayed that this, this is what passes for beauty. They look at a 200-pound woman and, after giving a cursory nod to her confidence, fret about her health—even though they’ve never seen her medical records. That’s a more polite conversation than one that argues against declaring her beautiful. But the mere fact that this Universal Standard model is in the spotlight in her underwear—just as the Victoria’s Secret angels have been and the Maidenform woman was a generation before that—is an act of political protest. It’s not about wanting to be a pinup but about wanting the right for one’s body to exist without negative judgment. As a society, we haven’t acknowledged her right to simply be. But at least the beauty world is giving her a platform on which to make her case.

This isn’t just a demand being made by full-figured women. Older women are insisting on their place in the culture. Black women are demanding that they be allowed to stand in the spotlight with their natural hair.

There’s no neutral ground. The body, the face, the hair have all become political. Beauty is about respect and value and the right to exist without having to alter who you fundamentally are. For a black woman, having her natural hair perceived as beautiful means that her kinky curls are not an indication of her being unprofessional. For a plus-size woman, having her belly rolls included in the conversation about beauty means that she will not be castigated by strangers for consuming dessert in public; she will not have to prove to her employer that she isn’t lazy or without willpower or otherwise lacking in self-control.

When an older woman’s wrinkles are seen as beautiful, it means that she is actually being seen. She isn’t being overlooked as a full human being: sexual, funny, smart, and, more than likely, deeply engaged in the world around her.

To see the beauty in a woman’s rippling muscles is to embrace her strength but also to shun the notion that female beauty is equated with fragility and weakness. Pure physical power is stunning.

“Own who you are,” read a T-shirt on the spring 2020 runway of Balmain in Paris. The brand’s creative director, Olivier Rousteing, is known for his focus on inclusiveness in beauty. He, along with Kim Kardashian, has helped popularize the notion of “slim thick,” the 21st-century description of an hourglass figure with adjustments made for athleticism. “Slim thick” describes a woman with a prominent derriere, breasts, and thighs, but with a slim, toned midsection. It’s a body type that has sold countless waist trainers and has been applied to women such as singer and fashion entrepreneur Rihanna who do not have the lean physique of a marathoner.

Slim thick may be just another body type over which women obsess. But it also gives women license to coin a term to describe their own body, turn it into a hashtag, and start counting the likes. Own who you are.

When I look at photographs of groups of women on vacation, or a mother with her child, I see friendship and loyalty, joy and love. I see people who seem exuberant and confident. Perhaps if I had the opportunity to speak with them, I’d find them intelligent and witty or incredibly charismatic. If I got to know them and like them, I’m sure I’d also describe them as beautiful.

If I were to look at a portrait of my mother, I would see one of the most beautiful people in the world—not because of her cheekbones or her neat figure, but because I know her heart.

As a culture, we give lip service to the notion that what matters is inner beauty when in fact it’s the outer version that carries the real social currency. The new outlook on beauty dares us to declare someone we haven’t met beautiful. It forces us to presume the best about people. It asks us to connect with people in a way that is almost childlike in its openness and ease.

Modern beauty doesn’t ask us to come to the table without judgment. It simply asks us to come presuming that everyone in attendance has a right to be there.

Related Topics

• FASHION AND STYLE
• SOCIAL MEDIA

Why we’re examining modern beauty—and how it matters for women

Ozempic and Mounjaro may also lower your risk of obesity-linked cancer

Why do we blindly follow trends—even when they’re bad for us?

Cholesterol, triglycerides, and nutrition: How your diet may increase your cancer odds

Girls are going through puberty much earlier. There may be several reasons why.

• Environment
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

• PSSR is handed over to Orients Social Research Consultancy (OSRC) from Fatima Gohar Educational and Welfare Society
• Only through proper channel submitted articles via Open Journal System (OJS) will be entertained.
• Quarterly Published
• The manuscript may be submitted electronically by 31st of January for Issue-I (January-to-March), 30th April for Issue II (April-to-June)
• , 31st July for issue III (July-to-September) and 31st of October for Issue-IV (October-to-December)
• Recognition by Govt of Pakistan (HEC) in Y category.

Current Issue

Ethical statement, publication policy, archiving policy, privacy statement, open access policy, licensing & copyright, scope & mission, indexing & abstracting, editorial team & board, advisory board, author guidelinese, plagiarism guidelines, call for papers, publication fee, complain / feedback.

RESEARCH OF SOCIAL SCIENCES (SMC-PRIVATE) LIMITED(ROSS) & PAKISTAN SOCIAL SCIENCES REVIEW (PSSR) adheres to Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License. The authors submitting and publishing in PSSR agree to the copyright policy under creative common license 4.0 (Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International license). Under this license, the authors published in PSSR retain the copyright including publishing rights of their scholarly work and agree to let others remix, tweak, and build upon their work non-commercially. All other authors using the content of PSSR are required to cite author(s) and publisher in their work. Therefore, RESEARCH OF SOCIAL SCIENCES (SMC-PRIVATE) LIMITED(ROSS) & PAKISTAN SOCIAL SCIENCES REVIEW (PSSR) follow an Open Access Policy for copyright and licensing.

How to Cite

On being and becoming beautiful: the social construction of feminine beauty.

• Dr. Saadia Abid
• Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
• Nagina Liaquat
• M. Phil, Department of Anthropology, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
• Dr. Aisha Anees Malik
• Assistant Professor, Centre of Excellence in Gender Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Volume & Issue

The Conflict Between Aestheticism and Morality in Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray

Patrick Duggan

Download this article

Oscar Wilde prefaces his novel, The Picture of Dorian Gray, with a reflection on art, the artist, and the utility of both. After careful scrutiny, he concludes: “All art is quite useless” (Wilde 4). In this one sentence, Wilde encapsulates the complete principles of the Aesthetic Movement popular in Victorian England. That is to say, real art takes no part in molding the social or moral identities of society, nor should it. Art should be beautiful and pleasure its observer, but to imply further-reaching influence would be a mistake. The explosion of aesthetic philosophy in fin-de-siècle English society, as exemplified by Oscar Wilde, was not confined to merely art, however. Rather, the proponents of this philosophy extended it to life itself. Here, aestheticism advocated whatever behavior was likely to maximize the beauty and happiness in one’s life, in the tradition of hedonism. To the aesthete, the ideal life mimics art; it is beautiful, but quite useless beyond its beauty, concerned only with the individual living it. Influences on others, if existent, are trivial at best. Many have read The Picture of Dorian Gray as a novelized sponsor for just this sort of aesthetic lifestyle. However, this story of the rise and fall of Dorian Gray might instead represent an allegory about morality meant to critique, rather than endorse, the obeying of one’s impulses as thoughtlessly and dutifully as aestheticism dictates.

In the novel, Lord Henry Wotton trumpets the aesthetic philosophy with an elegance and bravado that persuade Dorian to trust in the principles he espouses; the reader is often similarly captivated. It would be a mistake, however, to interpret the novel as a patent recommendation of aestheticism. To the aesthete, there is no distinction between moral and immoral acts, only between those that increase or decrease one’s happiness; yet, Dorian Gray refutes this idea, presenting a strong case for the inherent immorality of purely aesthetic lives. Dorian Gray personifies the aesthetic lifestyle in action, pursuing personal gratification with abandon. Yet, while he enjoys these indulgences, his behavior ultimately kills him and others, and he dies unhappier than ever. Rather than an advocate for pure aestheticism, then, Dorian Gray is a cautionary tale in which Wilde illustrates the dangers of the aesthetic philosophy when not practiced with prudence. Aestheticism, argues Wilde, too often aligns itself with immorality, resulting in a precarious philosophy that must be practiced deliberately.

Dorian Gray is often read as an explicit proclamation of the worthiness of living life in accordance with aesthetic values. This is due in part to the flourishing Aesthetic Movement of Victorian England at the time of the novel’s publication, as well as Oscar Wilde’s association with the movement itself (Becker 660). The Aesthetic Movement, which coincided with the Industrial Revolution at the end of the nineteenth century, emphasized the artistic aspect of a man’s work in producing a variety of goods, from furniture to machines to literature (Becker 660). Oscar Wilde, however, proposed that the principles of the Aesthetic Movement extend beyond the production of mere commodities. In Joseph Pearce’s biography, The Unmasking of Oscar Wilde , Pearce recalls Wilde’s own perspective on the popular movement. Speaking of aestheticism, Wilde is quoted:

It is indeed to become a part of the people’s life . . . I mean a man who works with his hands; and not with his hands merely, but with his head and his heart. The evil that machinery is doing is not merely in the consequence of its work but in the fact that it makes men themselves machines also. Whereas, we wish them to be artists, that is to say men. (qtd. in Pearce 144)

In his exposition of aestheticism, Wilde applies the philosophy in a more universal sense, stressing the positive influences of aestheticism in one’s life beyond mere craftsmanship. Just as the machines that mass-produce materials with the intervention of human thought are labeled “evil,” Wilde similarly condemns men who act as metaphorical machines, programmed to behave in accordance with society’s ideas of propriety rather than allowing themselves to act freely and achieve the greatest amount of happiness. Wilde’s eloquent advocacy of an aesthetic lifestyle is paralleled in his depiction of Lord Henry in Dorian Gray . Lord Henry lectured to the impressionable Dorian, “We are punished for our refusals. Every impulse that we strive to strangle broods in the mind, and poisons us. . . . Resist it, and your soul grows sick with longing for the things it has forbidden itself” (Wilde 9). Wilde, through Lord Henry, laments the stifling nature of his contemporary Victorian society and how the supposed morality it boasts necessitates self-denial and rejection of life’s most beautiful aspects. Lord Henry warns that without an enthusiastic embrace of aestheticism, one will perpetually anguish with the desire of precisely what he must deny himself, all for the sake of propriety. This philosophy espoused by Wilde and Lord Henry often leads, not surprisingly, to the conclusion that Dorian Gray is a declaration of Wilde’s, promoting the adoption of purely aesthetic lives without qualification. This, however, is too shallow of an interpretation.

Opponents of a purely aesthetic lifestyle will certainly cite what they consider an inevitability: one’s desires and impulses, though when acted upon result in a more pleasurable life, will at times be undeniably immoral. It is at these times that the virtues of the wholly aesthetic life become questionable. The ruination of Dorian Gray, the embodiment of unbridled aestheticism, illustrates the immorality of such a lifestyle and gravely demonstrates its consequences. Wilde uses Dorian Gray not as an advertisement for aestheticism, but rather, he uses Dorian’s life to warn against aestheticism’s hostility toward morality when uncontrolled. Wilde himself admits, in a letter to the St. James’s Gazette, that Dorian Gray “is a story with a moral. And the moral is this: All excess, as well as all renunciation, brings its own punishment” (Wilde 248). Aestheticism does well to condemn the renunciation of desires, but it is an excessive obedience to these desires that is subversively dangerous. Therefore, in the practice of Wilde’s aestheticism, forethought and constraint are necessities, yet too often lacking, and without them, one is doomed to suffer the same fate as Dorian Gray.

The character of Dorian Gray and the story of his profound degeneration provide a case study examining the viability of purely aesthetic lives. Dorian lives according to what Lord Henry professes without hesitation, and what Lord Henry inspires Dorian, through persuasive rhetoric, is an attitude indifferent to consequence and altogether amoral. As Wilde writes, Dorian’s newfound position is “never to accept any theory or system that would involve the sacrifice of any mode of passionate experience. Its aim, indeed was to be experience itself, and not the fruits of experience, sweet or bitter as they may be” (Wilde 125). Under Lord Henry’s mentorship, Dorian, once the epitome of wide-eyed youth, behaves with no regard for the ramifications of his actions, diligently pursuing instant gratification without thought of its implications, whether they be “sweet or bitter.”

Dorian’s relationship with the actress Sibyl Vane plainly illustrates this marked change in personality. Dorian pursues Sibyl from first sights, intent on acquiring her before he ever attempts to truly know her. Indeed, Dorian’s love for Sibyl is overtly superficial, as evidenced by Dorian’s own description of his infatuation with Sibyl: “I loved you because you were marvelous, because you had genius and intellect, because you realized the dreams of great poets and gave shape and substance to the shadows of art” (Wilde 101). Dorian is not attracted to Sibyl’s character of personality, but rather her acting talent and enthralling performances; this is what enchants the aesthetically inclined Dorian. When Sibyl leaves the stage, then, she no longer serves a purpose in Dorian’s aesthetic life, and thus, Dorian abandons her unceremoniously. Dorian does not regret informing Sybil that, “Without your art, you are nothing” (Wilde 101). The tragedy of Sybil’s later suicide, brought about by utter despair at her desertion, is lost on Dorian, who instead enjoys the dramatic intrigue of the occasion. For Dorian, whose uncontrolled aestheticism rejects the concept of morality, the immorality of his actions goes unrecognized. In fact, Dorian declares excitedly, “It seems to me to be simply like a wonderful ending to a wonderful play. It has all the terrible beauty of a Greek tragedy, a tragedy in which I took a great part, but by which I have not been wounded” (Wilde 114). Here, the adverse consequences of aestheticism surface in Dorian’s life. In his pursuit of his own pleasures, a distinctly narcissistic attitude emerges, and the incompatibility of morality and unconditional aestheticism becomes all the more apparent.

The emergence of narcissism in Dorian and its correlation with his newly adopted aesthetic philosophy is integral to Wilde’s novel as it emphasizes the frequent hostility between aestheticism and morality that Wilde cautions against. Dorian Gray exposes the immorality of self-absorption, as Dorian’s portrait becomes more disfigured with each one of Dorian’s selfish acts. This self-absorption, then, appears to be an inevitable consequence of aestheticism. Only a more deliberate practice of aestheticism may harness this egotism and avoid the immorality Dorian embodies. Interestingly, in his essay “Come See About Me: Enchantment of the Double in The Picture of Dorian Gray ,” Christopher Craft recognizes a mirroring of the Greek myth of Narcissus in the life of Dorian Gray. According to mythology, Narcissus, upon catching a glimpse of his reflection in a pool, becomes so enraptured by it that he stood and admired it endlessly, unmoving for the rest of his life. As Craft notes, this self-absorption “is a commitment that, like Dorian’s, graduates fully until death” (Craft 113). Narcissus becomes so infatuated with himself that the rest of world effectively ceases to exist or affect him and, as Craft argues, “it is into precisely this silent delirium that Dorian unwittingly steps” when he allows Lord Henry’s aesthetic philosophy to so dominate him (Craft 113). Dorian enjoys a life of eternal youth, with only his portrait aging in parallel with Dorian’s immorality; so, as Dorian sinks into the depths of narcissism, he maintains his external beauty, and his portrait degenerates instead. Eventually, as in the myth of Narcissus, such egotism has its consequences. When Dorian, disgusted with the decrepit picture of the supposedly “real” him, destroys it in a fit of anger, Dorian too is destroyed. Wilde writes that after Dorian’s death, “it was not till they had examined the rings that they recognized who it was” (Wilde 220). In the end, as a testament to the purely aesthetic life, the only legacy Dorian leaves behind—everything that identifies him as who he was—is his superficial jewelry.

There is an argument, then, made by Wilde for a new aestheticism, approached with more constraint than Dorian employs. This argument is based not only in the moral obligation of the individual, but with the betterment of all of society in mind. Matthew Arnold, in his essay “Culture and Anarchy,” provides reasoning against the ethos of Lord Henry’s aestheticism and an unconditional application of it. Arnold focuses on its detrimental effects on society and the possibility for societal improvement when aesthetic tendencies are properly controlled. There appears to be agreement, then, between Wilde and Arnold; Wilde’ novel provides a failed example of the purely aesthetic life, and when scaled to a larger society, a similar result is understandably expected. As Arnold views his contemporary society, it is arranged hierarchically, dividing the aristocrats, the middle-class, and the working-class, all of which, Arnold laments, are inclined to live hedonistically, pursuing pleasure and only what is comfortable and easy. Dorian Gray embodies just his defect in Arnold’s society. Arnold argues, however, that “there are born a certain number of natures with a curiosity about their best self with a bend for seeing things as they are . . . for simply concerning themselves with reason and the will of God, and doing their best to make these prevail;—for the pursuit, in a word, of perfection” (Arnold 277). Arnold is optimistic that some may pursue beyond the immediately pleasurable and act to perfect themselves both morally and intellectually. This pursuit of perfection, however, is likely an arduous and uncomfortable task, and is therefore incompatible with pure aestheticism. Some concessions must be made for the absolute aesthete, then, for such transcendence occur.

Dorian Gray, for much of Wilde’s novel, fails to embody Arnold’s ideal, as in his hedonistic life he is seen “creeping at dawn out of dreadful houses and slinking in disguise in the foulest dens in London,” despite being once too honorable for such debauchery (Wilde 118). Dorian exemplifies a regression in social intellect from his beginnings rather than the kind of transcendence hoped for by Arnold. Dorian displays no such pursuit of intellectual perfection as he is slowly corrupted and in turn corrupts others, luring them with him into the slums and opium dens of London. Arnold refers to those able to transcend social classes in society as “aliens,” hinting at their rarity to the point of foreignness and to their almost mythical quality (277). The mere existence of these aliens, however, provides hope that the utter hedonists of society may learn to harness their damaging tendencies, and in doing so, better the intellectual and moral state of humankind.

Wilde, too, recognizes this ability to control the hedonistic temptations associated with aestheticism, as demonstrated by the last stages of Dorian’s life. Mitsuharu Matsuoka, in his essay “Aestheticism and Social Anxiety in The Picture of Dorian Gray ,” notes that, as Dorian’s death approaches, “Dorian ultimately reacts against his lifestyle, choking on his New Hedonism,” at which point “a great sense of doom hangs over Dorian” (Matsuoka 78). Indeed, Dorian appears to realize the consequences of his unbridled aestheticism; however, he is much too far gone to salvage. Dorian reveals his epiphany to Lord Henry: “The soul is a terrible reality. It can be bought, and sold, and bartered away. It can be poisoned or made perfect. There is a soul in each one of us. I know it” (Wilde 211). Unfortunately for Dorian, this realization comes too late to save his soul from its degradation, long-nurtured by a purely aesthetic life, and he is destroyed. The realization itself, however, is indicative of Wilde’s argument woven throughout Dorian Gray . Despite Wilde’s publicly advocating the principles of aestheticism, Dorian’s demise illustrates Wilde’s recognition that aestheticism needs to be properly controlled. While the pursuit of beauty and happiness in life is always Wilde’s ideal, he also implies that the consequences of one’s actions must be thought out and the impact of one’s decisions, beyond oneself, must also be carefully considered before acting on any impulse.

The Aesthetic Movement in fin-de-siècle England, as interpreted by Oscar Wilde, revolved around the ideal that the utility of one’s actions should be to create the maximal amount of beauty and pleasure in one’s life, and nothing more. Wilde’s Dorian Gray appears, at first glance, to promote this philosophy unequivocally. Indeed, a lifestyle based on this aestheticism is espoused in Wilde’s opening preface as well as throughout Lord Henry’s professorial lectures. Upon closer inspection, however, Wilde’s novel is not as wholly embracing of aestheticism as this implies. Wilde realized and depicted in the life of Dorian Gray, a need for a more controlled and deliberate approach to aestheticism, without which morality will inevitably be elusive. The adoption of unrestrained aestheticism, as exhibited by Dorian, results in a lack of remorse, self-absorption, and intellectual regression. For the sake of preserving morality, a concept proven incompatible with pure aestheticism, more deliberation is necessary from the aesthete in deciding upon action. If, in the pursuit of one’s desires and of the beautiful aspects of life, the condition of others’ or of one’s own intellect is jeopardized, the enjoyment garnered must sometimes be sacrificed for the greater good. As Wilde makes clear, it is only through a more restrained philosophy that aestheticism and morality may eventually align.

Works Cited

Arnold, Matthew. “Culture and Anarchy.” The Picture of Dorian Gray . Ed. Andrew Elfenbein. NY: Pearson Longman, 2007. 276–279.

Becker-Leckrone, Megan. “Oscar Wilde (1854–1900): Aesthetic and Criticism.” The Continuum Encyclopedia of Modern Criticism and Theory 20 (2002): 658–665.

Craft, Christopher. “Come See About Me: Enchantment of the Double in The Picture of Dorian Gray .” Representations 91 (2005): 109–136.

Matsuoka, Mitsuharu. “Aestheticism and Social Anxiety in The Picture of Dorian Gray. ” Journal of Aesthetic Education 29 (2003): 77–100.

Pearce, Joseph. The Unmasking of Oscar Wilde . NY: Ignatius Press, 2004.

Wilde, Oscar. The Picture of Dorian Gray . Ed. Andrew Elfenbein. NY: Pearson Longman, 2007.

Social Media and Its Effects on Beauty

• September 2020
• In book: Beauty [Working Title]
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, Goa Campus

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Cristina Dora Ciobotaru
• Dana Feștilă

• SKIN RES TECHNOL

• Yong Xun Jin

• Mujtaba A Ali
• Ibrahim N Al Sulaiman
• Ahmed Aldhahri

• Evelin Horváth
• Jaishree Sharad
• Justin J. Cordero
• Sarah Eidelson
• Leonardo Alaniz

• Maria do Carmo Gouveia Peluzio

• Clin Nurs Res

• Jang-Soon Park
• Hye-Jin Kwon

• Christina Scharff
• J.J. Heidelbaugh
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Constructivism, Part I

Aleksandr Rodchenko, Spatial Construction no. 12 , c. 1920, plywood, aluminum paint and wire, 24 x 33 x 18.5” ( MoMA )

Aleksandr Rodchenko’s Spatial Construction no. 12 is one of a set of three-dimensional geometric forms generated by a simple iterative process. It began as a sheet of plywood cut into an ellipse. Rodchenko then made a second cut following the edge of the first to create a narrow oval ring. He continued cutting ever smaller rings until reaching the center.

Once cut, the rings were fanned out into three dimensional forms held in place by wire. They were covered with aluminum paint and suspended from the ceiling for exhibition, along with similar constructions cut from a square, a circle, a triangle, and a hexagon. These visually complex sculptures created by a simple process were the result of the Russian Constructivists’ goal to create rationally-produced objects based on fundamental laws of form and structure.

Constructing a new art for a new Russia

The Constructivists were a group of avant-garde artists who worked to establish a new social role for art and the artist in the communist society of 1920s Soviet Russia. They were committed to applying new methods of creation aligned with modern technology and engineering to art, and eventually to utilitarian objects. Their overall approach was theoretical and scientific, and they rejected the stereotype of the artist as intuitive and inspired.

They made a distinction between composition, which resulted from the artist’s intuition, and construction, based on scientific laws. Rodchenko’s Spatial Constructions were examples of the latter, forms structured by logical deduction, not intuition. They were considered “lab work” rather than art objects and were made to demonstrate theoretical concepts.

Obmokhu Exhibition, Moscow, 1921

Structure as form

Very few early Russian Constructivist works have survived, but the photograph of the Obmokhu (Society of Young Artists) exhibition where Rodchenko displayed his Spatial Constructions in 1921 shows a variety of Constructivist works. Most use simple geometric forms and straight lines, a visual language that suggests the basic structural units of modern engineering and architecture.

In two-dimensional works, paint strokes and free-hand drawings were replaced by lines and shapes created by ruler and compass. Most of the three-dimensional works were made of wood, but they have uniform smooth surfaces suggesting machine-made forms rather than textures created by the artist’s hand. As noted above, Rodchenko’s Spatial Constructions were covered with aluminum paint, and it is likely that they would have been made of metal if that had been feasible.

The visual language of many Constructivist works signifies the modern machine age in terms of structure as well as surface. Rodchenko’s hanging Spatial Constructions were dynamic forms with visible structures, rather than static sculptural masses on pedestals. The interest of the work lies, in part, in the way it demonstrates a system. Rodchenko’s Spatial Constructions create complex shifting patterns of solid planes, spaces, and shadows, but their basis is a simple, easily-grasped rational system. Recognizing the way this rudimentary system generates complex visual experiences is part of the works’ aesthetic pleasure.

Konstantin Medunetsky, Spatial Construction ( Construction no. 557 ), 1919, tin, brass, painted iron and steel, 46 x 17.8 x 17.8 cm (Yale University Art Gallery)

Materials and faktura

Konstantin Medunetsky’s Spatial Construction was also in the Obmokhu exhibition, but it displays different concerns from Rodchenko’s works. Instead of demonstrating a rational construction system, Medunetsky’s work displays contrasts between shaped metals. A tin S-curve, a steel circle, a brass triangle, and a red-painted iron parabola are interwoven and welded to a painted metal cube. The work is strikingly modern in its abstract formal language and its machine-age materials.

Vladimir Tatlin, Counter-Relief , 1913, wood, metal, leather (The State Tretyakov Gallery)

The different shapes of the metals demonstrate their material properties: the thin S-curve shows the great flexibility of tin; the thin triangle plate of brass highlights its qualities as a surface material; the heavy steel ring showcases its strength and flexibility; while the red-painted iron parabola is the stabilizing, unifying, and dynamic force of the composition. It also has symbolic references; it is like both a handle and an arrow pointing upward to the communist future, signified by the brilliant red paint.

The juxtaposition of different materials in Medunetsky’s work reflects the Constructivist  concept of faktura . Faktura was a much-debated term among Russian modernists in the first decades of the twentieth century that signaled a focus on the texture and working qualities of materials.

Vladimir Tatlin’s Counter- Relief is an example of a modern sculpture that was seen as primarily concerned with faktura . It is a non-representational sculptural assemblage of various found materials displayed in ways that demonstrate their properties. The wood, pitted and discolored with age, acts as a tack board for the other elements, including coarse-grained leather stained with different dyes and various types of metal with contrasting colors and sheens.

Each material is manipulated in ways that display its working qualities: the soft elasticity of the leather tacked to the upper half, and the stiff flexibility of the metal as it is bent into curved planes and twisted into a wire corkscrew.

Traditional Western sculptors such as Michelangelo or Bernini had generally attempted to transcend their materials: to make marble appear to be flesh or cloth. The philosophy of faktura was, on the contrary, to understand and display the fundamental properties of materials.

Aleksandr Rodchenko, Black on Black , 1918, oil on canvas, 84 x 66.5 cm (State Russian Museum)

In 1918 Rodchenko made a number of paintings that demonstrate pure faktura ; their surfaces were simply black paint applied to canvas in varied textures to create shapes. The paintings were made as a challenge to the white Suprematist paintings of Kasimir Malevich , which used white geometric forms as a means of spiritual communication. In contrast, Rodchenko’s black paintings made no reference to anything other than their material qualities.

Kasimir Malevich, Suprematist Composition: White on White , 1918, oil on canvas, 79.4 x 79.4 cm (MoMA)

The end of artistic intuition

Rodchenko’s challenge to Malevich’s Suprematism illustrates one of the essential tenets of Constructivism: the rejection of old conceptions of art and the artist. Despite his radical invention of pure geometric abstraction, Malevich was what the Constructivists considered an outdated and bourgeois artist. He was an individualist who believed that he created his art intuitively. In addition, Malevich was an idealist dedicated to a spiritual world and an art that communicated transcendental meanings and emotions. The Constructivists, in line with Communist tenets, rejected spiritual concerns in favor of the material world and laws determined by scientific means. The Constructivists’ “lab works” in the 1921 Obmokhu exhibition displayed their approach to making impersonal and scientifically-grounded forms that had no significance beyond their material existence as physical examples of rational systems.

Photo of Vladimir Tatlin’s Monument to the Third International

Synthesizing art and engineering

The work of Vladimir Tatlin was a major touchstone for the Constructivists. His Monument to the Third International , a model for a structure intended to house Communist Party functions, was a paradigm of the Constructivists’ efforts to synthesize art and engineering to create modern utilitarian forms for the new era. Tatlin himself, however, rejected the Constructivists’ dedication to the scientific production of works. Although his art was not engaged with spiritual concerns, as Malevich’s was, he believed the artist’s intuition could not be replaced by scientific laws.

After the 1921 Obmokhu exhibition the Constructivists left their theoretically-oriented lab works behind and became dedicated to utilitarian production. Their abstract formal ideas helped to shape designs for furniture and clothing, posters and theatrical productions, architecture and even manufacturing techniques. This turn to utilitarian projects was motivated in large part by the requirements and expectations of Soviet society and the massive drive to modernize and industrialize the country.

The Constructivists’ theories and ideas also became part of international conversations about the fundamental elements of art, designing for the modern world, and the education of artists. Another major focus for these debates was the German Bauhaus , and they resonated across the 20th century and continue to this day.

Bibliography

Christina Lodder, Russian Constructivism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983).

The Great Utopia: The Russian and Soviet Avant-Garde, 1915-1932 ( New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1992).

Cite this page

Your donations help make art history free and accessible to everyone!