||[Aug. 8th, 2005|03:20 pm]
Do you think that (for lack of better terms) poor lifestyles or rich lifestyles are more beautiful? You could say that poorer people have less money and have to become more creative with thier life or you can say that rich lifestyles are more beautiful because they can make their visions a reality to some extent.|
Are they both beautiful? Are niether beautiful?
I think both are beautiful in their own way.
Poorer people do have to be very creative in how they live, but I also think that Hollywood kind of glamorizes the poor lifestyle by making it seem more artsy and bohemian. But there is a lot of stress there in regards to not being able to pay bills or not knowing what or when you will eat again.
While the rich lifestyle can lend itself to overdoing things. Buying too much and indulging too much.
The beauty in both lifestyles comes from how people view life and what they do to make the world a better place.
That's my opinion
Or maybe I should be more specific...
ANY lifestyle has the ability to be beautiful.
And, of course, then we get into the whole 'how do you define beauty' thing. LOL.
To some, beauty must include something that has tangible beauty, like an attractive person or a piece of fine art. We could easily wave that off, but I don't think it's fair to say that physical beauty is bad...
To others, beauty is about the spiritual. Inner beauty would be an element of this, I'd say...
Being a bit of a a Trekkie, I like the I.D.I.C. concept!
In other words, you can find beauty anywhere and everywhere. You can create beauty where none previously existed. Or maybe it's just a case of beauty being in the 'eye of the beholder.'
Without $$$, we'd have no museums and amazing buildings, etc. That would be a loss.
But there's a simple beauty in poverty, too...
I'm now officially rambling.