【検証】140年前の美人、現代でも通用するのかガチで見た結果
This article conducts a serious investigation into whether a "beauty" from 140 years ago would still be considered attractive from a modern perspective. Online, comments are buzzing with a clash of values: some argue, "Universal beauty exists!", while others contend, "No, standards of beauty change with the times."
Related Keywords
Stylistic Beauty of Bijin-ga (Portraits of Beautiful Women)
Approximately 140 years ago, from the early to mid-Meiji period, Japanese ideals of beauty were often encapsulated in Ukiyo-e and Bijin-ga (portraits of beautiful women). These paintings were not mere realistic depictions but pursued a specific stylistic beauty, featuring visual characteristics that differ from modern definitions of "beauty." For instance, women depicted by Ukiyo-e artists like Kitagawa Utamaro typically had slender, downcast eyes, a well-defined small nose, rosy plump cheeks, and abundant black hair. These were the aesthetic norms of the time, reflecting the unique sensibilities of the artists. When this article examines "a beauty from 140 years ago," particularly if the source is Bijin-ga, the focus will be on how these stylistic elements compare to contemporary aesthetic sensibilities. Bijin-ga of that era played a role similar to modern fashion magazines or model photographs, presenting "what beauty is" to the public and shaping trends. Therefore, to understand the article's findings, it's crucial to know how significantly these depicted female figures influenced the general perception of beauty at the time. The stylistic beauty of Bijin-ga is an indispensable keyword for considering the gap between historical and modern aesthetics.
Evolution of Aesthetic Sensibilities and Cultural Relativism
The verification in this article is deeply related to the fundamental question of whether "beauty" is universal or whether it changes relatively with time and culture. Aesthetic universality is the idea that universal elements (e.g., the golden ratio, bilateral symmetry) exist that many people find beautiful across eras and regions. On the other hand, cultural relativism posits that standards of beauty are formed within specific cultures, societies, and times, and that no absolute beauty exists. In Japan 140 years ago, a small, long face, delicate eyes, and fair skin were considered beautiful, whereas today, with the influx of Western values, large eyes, a prominent nose, and healthy, tanned skin are also considered attractive. Furthermore, advances in makeup techniques and fashion styles have significantly transformed the expression of beauty. The article's question, "Can it still hold up today?" will be evaluated through the filter of this evolution of aesthetic sensibilities. If a beauty from that era is assessed as "holding up" by modern standards, it might be evidence of possessing universal elements of beauty. Conversely, if deemed "not holding up," it would demonstrate how culturally relative beauty standards fluctuate with the times. To delve deeper into these verification results, understanding the two concepts of aesthetic universality and cultural relativism is essential.
AI Facial Analysis Technology and Its Limitations
The phrase "We seriously investigated" suggests that this article likely involves verification based on objective data, not just individual subjective opinions. AI facial analysis technology is often utilized for this purpose. This technology can quantify facial features such as the position and ratio of parts, skin texture, and expressions, then score them based on common "standards of beauty" or "attractiveness." For example, it can objectively assess how closely a face adheres to mathematical beauty standards like the golden ratio or bilateral symmetry, or how well it matches trends considered a "beautiful face" today. By extracting facial features from historical Bijin-ga or old photographs and comparing them with AI's learned database of modern "beauty," it's possible to derive analysis results that are not biased by subjectivity. However, AI facial analysis technology also has its limitations. If the AI's training data is predominantly biased towards modern or specific cultural aesthetic standards, there's a debate about whether it's an appropriate metric for measuring "universal beauty." Furthermore, challenges remain regarding how well it can evaluate unquantifiable elements such as overall ambiance, historical context, or the charm conveyed by expressions, beyond just the beauty of individual facial parts. In the article, how the AI made its evaluations, how humans interpreted those results, and how the final conclusion was reached will be crucial factors determining the reliability of the verification.