Britain has become indifferent to beauty

Britain has become indifferent to beauty

19 Mar 2009

The panel debate the idea that beauty has lost its value in British society.

Championing the motion are David Starkey and Roger Scruton. David Starkey begins with a damning statement of Britain's appreciation of beauty, using art to back his argument up. He says that art should not be about self-expression or "doing your own thing", like in Norman Foster's buildings or Damien Hirst's art. Rather, art should revolve around beauty. Roger Scruton begins by comparing the modern British ideal of beauty - as exemplified by Kate Moss - to Botticelli's vision of beauty in The Birth of Venus. He argues that British people recognise beauty but do not respect it. He compares the modern lack of respect for countryside with previous generation's respect for it - as shown by the green belt planning of the immediate post-war periods.

Arguing against the motion are Germaine Greer and Stephen Bayley. Germaine Greer argues that beauty is inside all of rather than existing outside of us, and that whilst the British might be badly educated about aesthetics and easily seduced by kitsch, they are as appreciative as anyone else of the beauty of the natural world. Stephen Bayley draws attention to the fact that the British art schools are among the best in the world, and that seven out of the world's 40 best museums are in London. He suggests that the existence of National Trust, English Heritage and other organisations prove that British people are passionate about beauty, heritage, and the natural environment.

First Vote: 261 For, 219 Against, 124 Don’t Know

Final Vote: 244 For, 362 Against, 7 Don’t Know