Please respond to one of the following questions:
A. What did Tulips represent/mean in Holland early on (17th century, before tulipmania)? Why were Tulips a good fit for the Dutch? In other words, what can we learn about the Dutch based based on the Tulip?
B. After it was discovered that virus caused the magnificent color breaks, the Dutch went about eliminating the virus, thereby eliminating the tulip they so prized. What does it say about the Dutch that beauty was based upon a weakness? Do we do anything similar--prize something that may not be the healthiest?
C. How does income reflect people's perception of beauty or does it?
D. Pollan distinguishes Apollonian vs. Dionysian ideas of beauty. How does the Tulip fit into or perhaps blur these two views? Which view, in your opinion, do we value today?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A. The tulips were a chance for the Dutch to recreate their landscape. They lived in a dull environment. They were masters at changing the environment to make it beautiful and more purpuseful for themselves. They took the tulip which was full of color. It enhanced their landscape making it no longer a dull swamp but a lush, colorful garden all around. The tulipmania swept across Holland they probably craved it becuase it was also something to do when not at sea. Most of Holland were either farmers or sailors during the time period, mostly becuase of the East Dutch Trading company. They managed to control much of their landscape and they could also control the tulip, by manipulating the bulps and human desire. The virus also tells us something, that once something is diseased or currupt it is no longer beautiful, it is back like their old landscape they worked some hard to change.
ReplyDeleteAt the time the Dutch prized the broken tulips for their unique beauty they did not know that it was the result of a defect or weakness. Upon learning so they denounced the flower’s beauty to in one way to discontinue praising something flawed.
ReplyDeleteWe too have denounced the status of some things in our lives upon learning that they are unhealthy and/or flawed.
Cigarettes, alcohol, processed foods, fast food chains and drugs, although none physically beautiful have all been denounced from their pedestal as a result of research deeming them unhealthy. At some point in history each of these items has been idealized for convenience, comfort, fun, “coolness” and various others purposes that very much parallel how the beauty of the flower was used or admired rather. Each of these items have no real purpose in our lives, like the tulip had no real purpose for the Dutch, but are present as a form of entertainment more than anything else.
On page 104 the passage about bulb trading in back rooms and the whole notion of bidding on bulbs reminded me somewhat of the prohibition from 1920 to 1933. Drunkenness began to become a problem with the functioning of a community as a whole and was therefore deemed unhealthy for the productivity of all and banned. Although a loose analogy I feel like this shows how something once idealized in our culture for a good time (the same way a tulip = beauty) is denounced because of an originally unseen flaw. Cigarettes have had the same affect. Once praised for how cool they made an individual look have been demoted in the eyes of the public because of the health risks posed.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHolland in the 17th century was the richest European country, so they relished in
ReplyDeletebeautiful things. Aesthetics were very important to them, so the tulip, with its bright
colors was regarded as the most valuable flower to plant. The overall plain landscapes of
Holland, were dramatically brightened by tulips. Gardens were considered "jewel boxes."
The complete uselessness of the tulip was another draw to it, because its only purpose
was display. This made tulips a symbol of wealth. The Dutch thought the lack of scent was
a virtue, because it wasn't overly in one's face, instead one can enjoy each flower.
The tulip fit the Dutch's need for display at the time. Also it was a relatively new
flower, with no religious connections unlike most flowers. The tulips only meaning was
one of beauty to be enjoyed. This says a lot about what the Dutch valued then.
B.
ReplyDeleteWell, since the Dutch did not really know that their prized tulip was actually a weakness of the flower, it is really hard to negatively blame them for their lack of knowledge. However, it makes one think about how much people can find beauty in things that are really harmful to those they think beautiful in the first place. And, at the same time, how fast it can become unbeautiful, as is the case with the Dutch upon discovering the virus. If humans are so finicky and constantly changing with their thoughts of beauty, is anything really ever beautiful?
Furthermore, we must look upon present day with the same attitude. We prize many things that aren't healthy. Alcohol, for instance, is certainly prized (although a different kind of prized) in our culture, but it is usually very unhealthy. Television entertainment is prized as well, and can lead to obesity, among other things, yet we often see the images as beautiful and fantastic. The perfect looking fruits and vegetables that everyone wants to see in their supermarkets is, although maybe underlooked, is prized, even though they are sprayed with tons of pesticides. So, yes, we do prize things that are unhealthy. But unlike the Dutch, we know its unhealthy.
B. What does this say about the Dutch that beauty was based upon a weakness? “That this change [the entirely new way for a tulip to be beautiful due to breaks] came at the expense of the beheld suggests that beauty in nature does not necessarily bespeak health, nor necessarily redound to the benefit of the beautiful” (Pollan 91). I think this shows that the Dutch are very similar to every other nation, every other culture who values beauty that comes from weakness. Consider the Chinese; they bound women’s feet, bending and mutilating them for years until, eventually, the women weren’t even able to walk. Look at the African neck rings, or the corset, or steroids, or anorexia. It seems so ridiculous, but to many, it is beautiful. The Dutch, however, differ from this in that they were adoring an unhealthy flower rather than a human, but it also shows that once the Dutch discovered the root of the weakness, or the break, they no longer considered them to be beautiful and mysterious. Tulips became problematic and “lost their claim on human affection” (89). Unfortunately for the women (and men!) in today’s popular culture, frailty probably won’t be weeded out of anyone’s garden anytime soon. I don’t think an electron telescope, the invention that turned the Dutch against their precious tulips, will make Victoria Beckham start eating more.
ReplyDelete