An "Ugly" paph?

The appreciation of art, nature, music and practically all objects on this earth are very much subjected to controversial discussions. Such discussions arise mainly because of comparisons. I've been asking myself if indeed I can find an ugly looking paph and write a contrasting entry to my earlier ones. Out of curiosity, I googled "ugly paph" and found the following discussion in a forum (http://www.rv-orchidworks.com/orchidtalk/paphiopedilum-phragmipedium-cypripedium-bloom/17155-ugliest-paph.html) and the topic was on the appearance on the paph above and discussing on how different and ugly it is. Candidly speaking, it is not as pretty as the other paphs I've seen earlier but haven't we been somewhat influenced by the pre-set standards and comparisons on how a good looking paph should be with all the published horticulture articles and reading references?

Let us use a little of our imagination here that the above paph was the first paph species to be discovered. Adjectives describing the above paph will mostly likely be instantaneously changed to the more positive family of descriptions stating the above as "rare & original". I'm hoping for an agreement on this though (and I'm happy to see a few comments of appreciation of the above paph in the forum).

Isn't it ironic that some people subject themselves to the conformity of standardized measurement of value when they try so hard to be unparalleled in other aspects of life - work, appearances, wealth and fame?

***I was just thinking aloud on the subjectivity of beauty as I wrote this entry with no intention to discriminate or degrade any personal views and comments.