The last time I watched Federer vs Nadal was back in 2009. It was also when I fell in love with Roger Federer's impeccable footwork and placement on the court. Over the years, I developed a deep respect for his values - his sportsmanship, the fact that he carries himself like a gentleman both on and off the court, and the fact that he's also a family man. Whether he wins or loses, Federer will always be a winner in my eyes. That man is singlehandedly responsible for my appreciation of tennis, and sports and athletes in general.
This match is proof that intelligence trumps athleticism. Younger, fitter, faster and more aggressive on the court, by conventional wisdom, Nadal had every reason to win. Yet even with the time out and the delays in turning and breaking as a result of the left knee meniscal tear, Federer compensated with incredible leaps and strides in mental agility, stamina and focus. The time that he spent watching, visualising, and judiciously giving himself less time on the court, and more time to rest paid off.
He was able to hone in for the opportunity to deliver incredible volleys and angled shots with all the mastery of a chess grandmaster about to execute a checkmate. Watching the relish in his face as he delivered these shots with deft precision brought a smile to my own. Watching his incredible economy of movement was an aesthetic delight.
This match reminded me that you don't need to have youth and perfect facility to triumph. Injuries and setbacks can hold you back, but sometimes they are exactly what you need most to become stronger and better.
People like Alessandra Ferri and Roger Federer remind me that what you need to succeed is not found in merely the physical, but in the mind and spirit - drive, focus, and patience. Intelligent practise. Impeccable technique and timing. An incredible support team and life partner helps as well.
'...changing the form of one's mission's almost as difficult as changing the shape of one's nose:
they are, each, in the middle of one's face and one's character - one has to begin too far back.'
― Henry James. The Portrait of a Lady.
Showing posts with label aesthetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aesthetics. Show all posts
Monday, January 30, 2017
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Appearances
We're told that appearances don't matter. We shouldn't be fussed about them - that's vanity.
The thing is, all we can see of other people is their appearance. Even when you say you know someone really well, all you can really say is that you've seen their various appearances over either a long period of time or in varied circumstances, such that it gives the semblance of knowing them well.
We don't, and we can't present anything less than an appearance, to well, anyone.
Except perhaps God.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Life's sine qua non
Not infrequently, I come across a spark of something almost magical. Call it a flash of numinosity, or a sparkle of illumination, or even perhaps sheer aesthetic - it comes in the hearing of a pure voice, or sighting of a beautiful metatarsal arch. It comes in gaining insight into the mind of a genius, or observing the fluid grace with which certain people seem to prepossess.
All this sounds like a very sensorial experience, but I do know that when it happens to me, I cannot pinpoint exactly what senses or cognition I am using to apprehend the situation. What I do know though, is that it speaks to my soul in some inexpressible way. It makes me feel that there must be such a thing as beauty and truth in the world to be able to experience something like this. To feel so relaxed by the stimulation, to feel so excited by the sense of coherence and harmony that these experiences illicit. A thrill, I suppose, that is something akin to love.
Today I experienced such a moment listening to a lecture. The lecturer, a retired professor of anatomy and histology, left me feeling as though I didn't want him to stop. I just wanted to keep listening to him impart knowledge in his perfectly-formed, andante sentences. I was left with the desire to see more of the elegant way he saw biology, for he possessed the very clarity and alacrity I first felt when I started to fall in love with the amazing interconnectedness (and so simplicity) of Nature's way.
I've felt so strongly this way a few times before - famous people like Audrey Hepburn, Sylvie Guillem, Uliana Lopatkina, Beethoven, Richard Feynman, Anthony Grayling come to mind. But even day-to-day people have their sparkle, their je ne sais quoi that I find gives me hope of heaven.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
5x2 line poem
Can I write a poem,
and write it simply?
Not use any metaphors,
or flowery language,
or pretty imagery.
What do I write about, then?
What subject is suitably treated
without some technique?
What is a poem,
without aesthetic?
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Balanced perfection
As a child, beauty is simple, our ideals are simple. We find the lifelike, vividly detailed Da Vinci more appealing than surrealist Dali. We find the things that are pleasing to the eye beautiful. We see perfection as an ideal like getting a 100% on a test, or being eloquent, intelligent, graceful.
Now I realise that perfection isn't quite as simple as all that. Something that's too perfect actually loses some of its beauty, some of its perfection. Its flawlessness is an imperfection, and it makes it less interesting, less appealing. It's like the way master potters sometimes purposefully include flaws in their work. They could make perfect pots, the ideal pot, easily, yet they choose not to, because they see that perfection is also about the acknowledgement of flaws. In the same way, I realise that as much as striving to live up to the ideals of perfection, being perfect is also about the acknowledgement and acceptance of what is not perfect.
Actually, perfection is like dance. I once said that the most important aspect of ballet is balance. It's true for perfection. And balance doesn't mean taking the middle road, but allowing a dynamic equilibrium to occur as a result of the constant battle between the two extremes, striving for perfection, and your own imperfections.
Now I realise that perfection isn't quite as simple as all that. Something that's too perfect actually loses some of its beauty, some of its perfection. Its flawlessness is an imperfection, and it makes it less interesting, less appealing. It's like the way master potters sometimes purposefully include flaws in their work. They could make perfect pots, the ideal pot, easily, yet they choose not to, because they see that perfection is also about the acknowledgement of flaws. In the same way, I realise that as much as striving to live up to the ideals of perfection, being perfect is also about the acknowledgement and acceptance of what is not perfect.
Actually, perfection is like dance. I once said that the most important aspect of ballet is balance. It's true for perfection. And balance doesn't mean taking the middle road, but allowing a dynamic equilibrium to occur as a result of the constant battle between the two extremes, striving for perfection, and your own imperfections.
Labels:
aesthetics,
balance,
dance,
perfection,
philosophy
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Beauty ain't perfect
I was discussing the concept of beauty with Jenn the other day, and I realised that I needed to reconceptualise my idea of beauty. My sense of aesthetics has changed these past few years, a new revelation marking each progressive stage.
Initially, I thought that beauty was a series of ideals - the ideal figure, the ideal complexion. Beauty had to be absolutely flawless in every way, or at least, as flawless as it is possible to be in this imperfect world. I could classify very few people under this concept of beauty, and most aren't even alive today. Certainly none of my friends or the people I met everyday qualified as beautiful under this rigid dogma.
Then I began to see beauty in the everyday. Little things, but graceful and wonderful in their way: the cute upturn of nose, or the wonderfully expressive eyes. I started to realise that beauty is diverse. Although I still held onto my own ideals, but I became open to appreciating the deviations, which could be just as beautiful in their way. It was around this time that I began to realise just how beautiful a lot of my friends were.
After talking to Jenn, it dawned on me that beauty wasn't just about the exterior facade. I realised that part of the reason why I found my friends so beautiful was because of their character - their compassion, their honesty, their love - it all shone through on their faces, though perhaps it was not completely apparent to those who did not know them well enough to see it. But perhaps having to make the effort made the beauty all the more rare and beautiful. I realised that you just couldn't simply isolate the physical exterior from the inner one, something I thought it was possible to do all along.
Initially, I thought that beauty was a series of ideals - the ideal figure, the ideal complexion. Beauty had to be absolutely flawless in every way, or at least, as flawless as it is possible to be in this imperfect world. I could classify very few people under this concept of beauty, and most aren't even alive today. Certainly none of my friends or the people I met everyday qualified as beautiful under this rigid dogma.
Then I began to see beauty in the everyday. Little things, but graceful and wonderful in their way: the cute upturn of nose, or the wonderfully expressive eyes. I started to realise that beauty is diverse. Although I still held onto my own ideals, but I became open to appreciating the deviations, which could be just as beautiful in their way. It was around this time that I began to realise just how beautiful a lot of my friends were.
After talking to Jenn, it dawned on me that beauty wasn't just about the exterior facade. I realised that part of the reason why I found my friends so beautiful was because of their character - their compassion, their honesty, their love - it all shone through on their faces, though perhaps it was not completely apparent to those who did not know them well enough to see it. But perhaps having to make the effort made the beauty all the more rare and beautiful. I realised that you just couldn't simply isolate the physical exterior from the inner one, something I thought it was possible to do all along.
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Who is the fairest of them all?
It's quite common to hear people lamenting that the world isn't fair. It's very uncommon, though, to hear people complaining that the world isn't beautiful.
I think God created the world with the concept of beauty in mind, rather than the concept of fairness. If everybody was born with equal amounts of the same amount of everything, and the world was evenly distributed with the same natural resources et cetera, it would be monotonous, and of course, ugly.
As an alleged beauty lover, I have to say that I think God's vision is better than having human perceptions of fairness reign. I'd rather have a world of diversity and beauty in that than a fair but prosaic world.
I think God created the world with the concept of beauty in mind, rather than the concept of fairness. If everybody was born with equal amounts of the same amount of everything, and the world was evenly distributed with the same natural resources et cetera, it would be monotonous, and of course, ugly.
As an alleged beauty lover, I have to say that I think God's vision is better than having human perceptions of fairness reign. I'd rather have a world of diversity and beauty in that than a fair but prosaic world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)