By Bаυеr Westeren

After doing a little research, I have come to the conclusion that the philosophy of D. Bell's website, "Superbeauty", is only found in the images of beautiful nude women who also seem to embody the values that we as people hold dear, and is the most complete and all-encompassing philosophy on why such beauty is not only a pleasure to behold, it is downright necessary.

It seems that this philosphy takes several ideas and rolls them all up into a perfect package.

The first of these ideas, or philosophies, is called Rоmаntіc Rеаlіsm. In Rоmаntіc Rеаlіst art, the artist tries to embody in his/her work not only physical beauty, but certain moral values as well. However, Romantic Realism differs from the Body in Mind philosophy in that not all of the images need to be of a beautiful nude woman. I have seen images that apparently fall under the category of Rоmаntіc Rеаlіsm that are only aesthetically pleasing. For example, the cover art of several of Ayn Rаnd's novels have been described as Rоmаntіc Rеаlіst painting. Now, perhaps this is a wrong designation on the part of whoever categorized these images, but for the sake of argument, let us assume that this is truly an example of Rоmаntіc Rеаlіst art. The image of a nude man, kneeling and seemingly made of gold or bronze may be considered beautiful. However, this image does not show any true moral value (such as happiness, youthfull energy etc.). Other examples include melancholy paintings of reclining nude women. Again, while these images are beautiful in their own right, and may embody some moral values such as youth, they are still lacking in many of the moral values that just one photograph at Body in Mind portrays (joy, pride, youth, confidence).

The second philosophy is called Post-Romanticism. If I understand Post-Romanticism correctly, it is more interested in the sensual aspects of a beautiful image. A beautiful landscape or a black and white photograph of a single breast is considered a Post-Romantic image. There is no moral value displayed in many of these images. As with Rоmаntіc Rеаlіsm, the lack of these moral values portrayed in the images does not detract from the purpose of the photograph. However, the images of Body in Mind not only show more moral values than Rоmаntіc Rеаlіsm seems to call for, but they are also very sensual. The women are not only nude, but there is an inherent mystery in them and an emotional longing to gaze upon these images. We are captivated by these women. They are not their purely for our sexual appetites. To paraphrase the website postromanticism.com, a woman can be fully clothed and have an obviously sexual expression on her face. This image is sexual. Another woman can be completely nude yet in her expression is an air of mystery and many of the qualities that are appealing to us. This image is sensual. The images at Body in Mind absolutely fall under the latter heading.

The final philosophy that Body in Mind adopts into its own is one that is prSlavalent in America. Beauty is good. However, as much as this idea exists in America, there is still something not quite right. We say that beauty is a good thing, and yet we are jealous of it. We say that the human body is a wonderfull creation, but when someone shows too much of it, they are corrupting our children and leading to the decline of American society. This may stem from the fact that we in America automatically equate beauty with sex. A beautiful woman is walking down the street in a short black dress that accentuates her body. We automatically assume that she is looking for a partner. And if she were to brush of any advances, we would call her a hypocrite and a tease. A woman cannot show of her body with pride without giving off, however inadvertantly, signals that she wants to have sex. In the world of Body in Mind, a woman can show of her body for the sake of showing the world something beautiful.

It may have been noticed already, but the three philosophies described above seem to say one thing and yet they are willing to have exceptions to their rules. In Rоmаntіc Realism, a piece can be aesthetically beautiful and not show any real moral values inherant in the piece. This despite the fact that their philosophy says that moral values need to be included. In Post-Romanticism, the images are sensual, but moral values are not necessary. In the philosophy of America, we are the ones who are hypocritical. We say that beauty is a good thing. And yet we demonize it and destroy it at every turn. And we pollute the purity of "Superbeauty" by injecting an unneccesary correlation between sex and beauty. The philosophy of Body in Mind does not get confused. It takes the ideas of moral values and places them in the photographs. It says that the only way to show "Superbeauty" is to show the emotional and physical beauty of the subject. This is only possible if the face of the model is shown. And it stands up for it's belief that beauty is a moral, and necessary good in this world.

The ideas of Rоmаntіc Rеаlіsm, Post-Romanticism and the Philosophy of beauty in America do not take it far enough. The world should thank Mr. Bell that he is willing to take his philosophy far enough.

SAMPLE | JOIN | MEMBERS | MORE GALLERIES | LINK

© 2004 by Body in Mind