Feeling aesthetics There has been numerous discussions about the topic of aesthetics and the recipe of how to reach the ultimate beauty. The hunt is as old as the first architecture - the act of reflection towards anything built or created - and it resembles to story of Fountain of Youth in a lot of ways. Many scholars end up reaching out to ancient civilisations and their knowledge of mathematical rations and relations of forms and masses. Which in my opinion is a dead end street and not even a scratch to the surface. Trying to prove the almighty golden ratio or even biomimetics and the law of natural beauty in search of ratios and proportions post festum to an already built architecture is a common mistake.
Let me explain, there sure will be concrete conclusions and even repetitions, but trying to apply them to a different concept or surrounding unskilfully will with certainty look clumsy and out of place. To create a product out of nothing, based only on a mental space of a creator would often be called art, whereof architecture would always be based out of of surroundings, needs or simply a question. Architecture which answers only a question of beauty and is based on it as a main reason or concept of building, needs an explanation and this is why ratios, proportions and even star alliance come in handy. To excuse their presence.
A skilful master would still be aware of all of these natural rules and concepts written by thinkers throughout history, but his main skill would be filtering out a knowledge that is based in consciousness through the unconscious part of creative process responsible for creating beauty and feeling of affection or disgust. Evolutionary our brain is not capable to reason with such concepts consciously, so lets try to reverse the question of not how to create a feeling for people to respond to, but why do we even feel the affection towards some architectures and what actually is the mood that surrounds us in presence of beauty and how are they different.
Is it a mood the one that is responsible for beauty or is mood actually beauty? Moodboarding is a technique of creating a space in a world that responds to already seen environment, space or a world through mashuping, mixing and adapting several factors to a new question and forming a new world. So it would be safe to say that this newly created world is related to the others from the same moodboard, it could also be said that they come from the same neighbourhood or neighbourmood.
Moodboarding technique is most commonly used in a movie industry, an industry that is quickest and most straight forward in creating new worlds to adapt it to a story that it is trying to tell. Its been said that all of the melodies have already been composed, all of the tempos have been tried out and all of the sounds and instruments can be measured in frequencies therefor also possible to recreate. Interesting that each song can sound as fresh as the first one ever created due to the unconscious creative filter responsible for correct collaging of the elements.
The same goes for movies. If one would moodboard one movie to create a new one it is inevitable that the new movie would look related to the moodboarded one. If one would moodboard two movies to create a new one, the new one would be related to both and positioned on a range of one extreme as movie 1 to other extreme as movie 2 in a certain ratio depending on how much each one has influenced the new one.
Therefore more movies would create a two or more dimensional range or map of movies depending on their mood relations.
Movies in the following map are picked by their honesty or dedication to a specific mood. They are primal mood movies in todays time - meaning that map has the dimension of time and is ever evolving, which we will cover later. All of the 19 primal mood movies are grouped into 9 themes (Apocalyptic, Cartoonish, Alieny, Nature, Scifi, AntiNormal, Ancient, Historic and Normal - the names are related to the original word meaning but are not to me confused with techniques, time or any other meaning and are therefor just names of a thematical mood region) and are positioned in proximity of relation that they are to each other in terms of mood. Relatedness of movies is felt by gradual change in mood from one to the other as in a range of multiple extremes. Because movies have the time factor and story telling tendency, mood always changes throughout. Even the most basic primal mood movies have a shift in mood even though its not a drastic one, which happens always in a relation to the story its trying to tell. Thinkers have already covered and dissected the philosophy of each story and the smallest possible common factor of all of the stories is a concept of a circle of four quadrants (monomyth), meaning there will be four parts of a story following in four basic moods felt visually in movies. So it would be safe to say that the relation of four moods in a movie is actually a storyteller in itself.
Because map covers the whole range of moods ever created it is also possible to position any movie on it via mixing different regions.
Edward Scissorhands
But where do these moods come from and who they are actually? Coming back to the topic of moodboarding some would say that not only movies get to be moodboarded. And it is true, not only movies but visuals or pictures of every product of creative process gets to be in a moodboard, meaning there must be a moodboard or range and relations of everything created, an universal moodmap so to say.
But what does it consist of? What are the rules of this map? Going back to time when first architecture was created, it had nothing to lean to except the evolutionary product of surrounding nature, meaning it had to resemble it.
ClichĂŠ - I know...
It was the first point in a moodmap, a mixture of natural surrounding and architecture (creative process of accommodating needs and answering questions). Second thing created was very similar to first, either because it leaned on the same technological techniques, answering the same question or simply seeing the first thing. So it would mean that the universal moodmap is ever expanding in all directions - a moodmap is actually a sphere, growing exponentnally with more moods to mix from, the more can be created.
But is it time, the factor that is expanding the circle? People are actually free to do nothing and die off, so no. Borrowing electrical jargon it is the creative current that is expanding the map. And current, because every newly created mood is not necessarily a quality mood that makes you feel the same amount of emotions (affection or disgust - doesn't matter, the amount of feeling is the one to measure). Quality is therefore a product of creative voltage, an actual creative power that defines quality mood or even quality aesthetic. So how many factors are making the moodmap, how many dimensions are there? Each new mood is created by a human with mashing one or numerous previously created moods by the amount of creative current (the distance of newly created mood to previous ones) and the amount of creative voltage (the quality regarding all of the previous moods)
Voltage Current y
Current x
The same principle would follow for what moods consist of and what elements (props) consist of. An repetetive process of layering and dissecting elements of visually beauty or mood leads us to believe that the last layer consists of color materiality and reflectivness.
Movies
Moods
Elements
Color/Materials/Reflectivness
So where is the beauty in this story? It stays hidden in precise even mathematical proportions and relations of elements and layers. It is in the tree of information throughout layering. A process that will stay hidden in unconscious, unreachable to concsciousness but felt physically and emotionally. The only skill we have to rely on consciouslly is the skill to recognize what makes us move and believe in the basic emotions and feeling of affection.
Duťan Sekulić