Physical proportion, cosmic order, and inner virtue in the Hellenic idea of the beautiful.
About Beauty. The Maison Philippe Montagne series on la quête de la beauté through the ages.
A beautiful body, a beautiful cosmos, a beautiful soul.
The Greeks never left us a single theory of beauty. What they left instead is something more interesting: a word, kalon, stretched loosely across three different registers at once, applied without much apparent trouble to a well-made body, a well-ordered universe, and a well-lived life. Say the word about an athlete and it meant beautiful. Say it about a courageous act, or about the turning of the stars, and it still meant beautiful — as though rightness, wherever it showed up, always answered to the same name.
Begin with the body, since that is where the eye naturally goes first. The young men who trained in the gymnasium at dawn were not simply exercising; they were being shaped, quite deliberately, toward an ideal — the trained body as the visible sign of arete, a word that named physical excellence and moral worth in the same breath, refusing to separate them.
A beautifully proportioned figure was assumed, more or less automatically, to carry a beautifully ordered soul inside it, and the assumption ran the other way too: to let the body go was, in some quiet sense, to let the self go with it. This is why Greek sculpture spent two centuries in patient, almost obsessive pursuit of the correctly proportioned human figure — moving from the stiff, forward-marching kouroi of the early period toward bodies that finally seemed to breathe. 
Getting the proportions right was never purely a formal exercise. It was closer to an act of respect.
But the Greeks did not stop at the body, and this is the part I find myself returning to. They looked up, and they found the same logic waiting in the sky. The very word they used for "universe" — kosmos —
is the same word a woman would use for her jewellery,
or a general for his troops properly arranged before battle.
Order was not something imposed on the world from outside; order was what made the world a world in the first place, rather than a heap of accident. Pythagoras, on Samos, heard this order in a plucked string — the octave, the fifth, a handful of simple ratios, each pleasing for exactly the reason a plumb line is pleasing. Plato, generations later, imagined a divine craftsman shaping the physical world by looking to an eternal, beautiful model, folding the elements into geometric solids because number, for him, was the deepest grammar available for describing anything done well. Even Empedocles' strange cosmology, with its universe held together by the alternating pull of Love and Strife, is really the same claim dressed differently: that beauty is what you are looking at whenever the world, for a moment, has arranged itself.
And then, quieter than either of these, there is the third face, the one that asks something harder of a person than proportion ever could. The Greeks had a compound word for their highest human type, kalos kagathos — beautiful-and-good, spoken so often as a single breath that it is not always clear where the one ends and the other begins. Xenophon has Socrates turning this exact question over at a dinner party, pressing his guests, half teasing, on whether a beautiful face without a beautiful character is worth anything at all — and finding, as one might expect from Socrates, that it is not. 
Sappho had already gone further, a century or two earlier, in a fragment that still unsettles the tidier theories: she writes that some call an army the most beautiful thing on earth, others a fleet of ships, but she says it is simply whatever a person loves. Beauty, on her account, was not a fixed inventory waiting to be measured.
It lived in the attachment, not only in the object — a thought the stricter geometers of beauty tended to leave quietly to one side.
What strikes me, coming back to all three faces at once, is how little effort the Greeks made to reconcile them into a single tidy doctrine. A beautiful body, a beautiful cosmos, a beautiful soul — these were never three separate claims needing three separate proofs. They were three appearances of the same underlying instinct: that beauty is simply what rightness looks like, wherever rightness happens to show up. It is an instinct we still reach for without quite noticing, every time we call a solution to a problem beautiful, or an old friendship, or a piece of music that finally resolves — meaning, each time, that something has come together the way it was always meant to.
There is a tinier version of this at Maison Philippe Montagne, on the evenings when a bag's proportions are finally right, the look of it somewhat avant-garde, but definitely timeless, and that the march to beauty has come to its destination. What a feeling, what a joy.
I would go with Sappho on this, perhaps Beauty is simply whatever a person loves.
Philippe Montagne, Paris
Sources & Further Reading:
Xenophon, Symposium, on kalos kagathos; Sappho, fragment 16, on beauty as what one loves; History of Aesthetics, vol. I; J.J. Pollitt, The Ancient View of Greek Art (Yale, 1974).
What makes a bag beautiful ? ArtDeco and the pursuit of beauty
About beauty. Proportions, symmetry and the classical ideal