Herbert Spencer was not alone in his evaluation of George Eliot’s appearance. Henry James once reported that Eliot was “magnificently ugly – deliciously hideous.” His conclusion differed. He wrote, “Now in this vast ugliness resides a most powerful beauty which, in a few minutes, steals forth and charms the mind, so that you end as I ended, in falling in love with her. Yes behold me literally in love with this great horse-faced bluestocking.” While looks indubitably matter for humans, and rarely go unnoticed, the standards of beauty are far from our sole measurement for judging other people or art. As James suggests, the very contradiction of beauty may occasionally fascinate, even entice us as much as beauty itself, though in a divergent fashion.
Often mixed with the concept of desirability, beauty can represent the apparent primary factor in choosing mates. In some ways, the more normal a person looks, the more beautiful they are considered. Features are not too large or small, or far apart or near together, or tilted up or down. People who look too different may seem as though they have more genetic divergence from the healthy population. Symmetry, in particular, is considered an attractive feature, most likely because some genetic malformations and parasites contracted as a child may lead to asymmetrical appearance that broadcasts the poor health of an individual. Other attributes recognized as beautiful, such as lustrous hair, may indicate good nutrition, and a malnourished person is less likely to have a healthy child. Our innate goal is to reproduce our genes, and instinct demands that we seek the best possible chances for our offspring’s survival. By choosing to reproduce with a more symmetrical or beautiful person, we may increase these chances. Evolutionarily, beauty has a place.
Even on the purely physical, biological level, however, beauty is not the only indicator of good health and fitness for reproduction. Strength, agility, resistance to disease, and, in women, ratios of hip to waist size that suggest an ability to survive childbirth are also factors.
Beyond the biology, beauty has a place in society not only as a marker of evolutionary fitness, but also as a status symbol, characterized by different traits according to the community and culture. Further, these traits are sometimes distorted from or irrelevant to what most benefits our biological imperative to reproduce. Ornamentation, coloring of hair or skin, body modification (such as foot binding, neck stretching, piercing, or tattooing), and particular body weight, whether high or low, to indicate wealth. The focus on extremely thin, narrow-hipped women in our society is especially surprising because it so rarely indicates a body prepared for childbirth. This seeming contradiction exemplifies how our societies may fight our natures, and why the standards of beauty are various and imperfect measures. The fact that surgeries, cosmetics, and clothing may be used to make a person appear closer to his or her culture’s ideal lessens even more the usefulness of physical appearances as a measure of a person. Industries revolve our desperate attempt to alter or improve our appearances, and sink constantly changing standards into our minds about the way we should and should not look.
Although rooted in biology, our ideas of beauty are flawed, and our use of them more so. In modern society, many traits lessen the value of beauty in our judgments of others. Although some suggest that employers as well as peers like supposedly attractive people more, numerous qualities overcome beauty. Even in mates, humans must seek not only good physical qualities, but also emotional and mental strengths. Emotional attraction is not against our biological drive. We must expect mates to be capable of caring and providing for young, especially considering the extraordinary span of time humans spend raising offspring. Our species requires over a decade of care before reaching even the biological minimum of independence, which is reproductive age. In our society, the education required to survive and earn a living has children legally dependent on their parents until eighteen years of age, and, according to most professional and graduate schools, financially dependent for more than a decade after that. The persistence, intelligence, and loyalty necessary in a mate to support children become increasingly important as the time of dependence lengthens.
In professional relationships, the non-physical characteristics of a person are valued even more. The work ethic, intellect, and skill of a person are highly esteemed in complex, interdependent societies with specialized duties. Models may be expected to be thin and beautiful, but if someone has an amazing voice, artistic talent, or scientific knowledge and ingenuity, their appearances become nearly irrelevant in our evaluations. While something about George Eliot’s “deliciously hideous” face may have left Henry James “impressed, interested, and pleased,” he was most likely largely captivated with her as a writer. He reviewed many of her works, and considered her a literary genius, though, as all are, imperfect.
Eliot’s language was beautiful, often brilliant. But it was not, and did not portray all in a symmetrical, immediately appealing fashion. Like all good writers, Eliot utilized breaks with balance to make a point to her audience. In art, while the classically symmetrical and euphonious appeals to us, it is not all we seek. The ability to revolt an audience is perhaps as important as the ability to charm it. The asymmetrical composition of a photograph or painting may be used to throw the viewer off. The subject may be horrible or hideous – a remnant of war or disaster, and still inspire an audience. The apparently ugly is often as necessary for a work as the beautiful. In art, as in people, we are ever aware of beauty and its absence, but also of its inability to sustain us alone. When we forget the insufficiency of Beauty, she leaves us in the lurch. Without the dark, the painful, the ugly, our art is empty. Without a better, morally or intellectually based standard for others, our societies and lives wither. Without respect for ourselves as human beings, irrespective of subjective beauty, our energy and possibilities waste away.
