Insofar of a permanent attraction and attention for beauty, our ability to think and to make is but a response to an innate desire to communicate with and maintain the order of a perceived Cosmos.
Through the exploration of new mediums out of which artifacts are shaped, this dialogue, to an extent - aimed at preserving and furthering a primordial harmony; consequence of a union between all living and non living agents of the world.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." By existing beyond time, space and matter, 'God', as a word (separated from its associated layers of meaning garnered over time) tries not to make itself fit any conception. It lives - impersonal - outside of this original context, within which the world and its agents evolved. Consequently, the ideas and actions derived from the light which the word sheds refers to an absolute perfection which we cannot conceive. Nonetheless, within our physical reality, this perfection possesses a correspondence we can sensorially apprehend but are incapable of defining truly. Beauty is the supreme mystery of this world, an echo to a primordial impersonality.
And God created man in his own image. Again, it is vital to consider the word 'God' as a concept rather than a symbol, which brings about the thought that Man possesses an innate sacred ability to make; to engender. And by sacred I mean, that of which relates to the original and inconceivable entity which wielded our universe into existence. That in everyone of us lies the potential to allow for an absolute perfection to manifest itself. Yet, our personality which is the part of us that belongs to error and sin taints our efforts and prevents that perfection to happen. It is not an easy exercise, to say the least, to fathom the idea that something which we cannot conceive, allowed for no apparent reason other than it did, for our universe to come into existence. That the intentionality should be aimed at the idea itself, for it demands our total annihilation. We see it in all of which inhabits the highest spheres of our mind and the deepest layers of our soul. Gregorian chant, Romanesque architecture, the Iliad, and the invention of geometry were not, for the people through whom they were brought into, made available to us, occasions for the manifestation of personality. They were and still are but a faceless figure, a dialogue with the impersonal and divine order of the world. Much like the reveal of a prestigious magic trick, throughout history, a relatively small number of men and women allowed its majoritarian counterpart to see what they could not see by themselves.
That is not to say that personality manifesting is fundamentally wrong. One can just look at the different contemporary artistic and design movement such as the Arts & Crafts, Futurism and the Bauhaus. All pretenders to the crown of Beauty. In regards to their philosophy, all accounted for a view of the world, which rationalized under the form of a narrative - often manifestos - gave rise to codes that aimed at furthering this said perception. These codes were to allow for the creation of processes that shaped the way forms were to be made. In turn these forms went on to shape our material reality and our understanding of it. Nonetheless, contemporary occidental creative philosophies are not the only articulation of this thoughts. Concurrently, the Asian continent has been the cradle to multiple traditional systems of Design and sacred space that aimed at working with the subtle laws of Nature that govern creation. On a spiritual and physical level, these philosophies aimed in part at exploring the relationship that exists between 'us' and what is around us. Ultimately, working towards allowing for an ideal association and placement of things insofar of a designated space, which we'll come back to later.
In other words, should we care more about the idea itself rather than the audience the idea is destined towards?