Ideal versus real
Earlier this evening, while seated in one of our “designated reading positions”, I happened across an editorial pointing out the singular difference between Greek and Roman art. Without a course or two in art history, I still caught the key point.
You see, the Greeks believed in the ideal form, whereas the Romans figured you should show the flaws. Simple, right? Let’s apply it to some random hobby groups.
Model trains and planes. Either you make your model look like the catalog illustration (Greek), or you cover the sides and wheels in grime (Roman). One requires imagination, while the other requires imagination. OK, but there’s still a difference. Think of a kid before a trip to the mud pit and then after. Or an egg in the shell versus the frying pan.
How about housekeeping. In one case, you keep the house in a perpetual state of neat; in the other, you get to clean up occasionally, but there’s some living between the blitz sessions. Each style requires a matching mindset, but one (from my vantage point) is much easier on the blood pressure.
Shopping. One style emphasizes refilling an empty cupboard, while the other emphasizes refilling an empty cupboard. Oops, I did it again. But I think you have the concept in your pocket. Idealism or realism. One requires great effort to attain, the other requires great effort to retain.
After checking in the mirror, I’m a “for sure” candidate for a Roman art show. My blemishes and scars are actual, real, a result of living. The last time I fit the “ideal”; nope, I can’t remember that far back.
