Live data from Hacker News

Is there such a thing as good taste?

paulgraham.com

201–210 of 479 posts

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#201
post #88

I think Christopher Alexander has a better answer to this question. He states that anything that is designed is good when love was put into it. People can taste this love. So it's more like: when love was put into it, it tastes good.

I was wondering if anyone would bring Christopher Alexander up in this thread, because his work has been a long attempt to answer this question. His claims about the objectivity of beauty, order, and so on, are counterintuitive to contemporary assumptions. But he has certainly gone deeply into the question—like a deep sea diver, or like someone drilling for water in a desert.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#202

As others have mentioned, Bourdieu would like a word with him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_(book) Graham seems to be conflating skill with taste. The artists he mentions are skilled at art and he states that he is not. Distinguishing between skilled and unskilled work may be "good taste" but what is considered good art is more than just skill.

Edit: OK fine, I'll shut up.

There's plenty of things to complain about in PG's essays, but subject matter expertise is not one of them. PG has been an practitioner and student of art for decades.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#203
post #4

This question is what Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance is all about - that quality is objective. I know PG is familiar with that book, which is why I find it odd that there's no mention of it in this essay.

My thought as well. He seems to be delving into the metaphysics of quality.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#204
The reason most people are dismissive about quality or "taste" in art, or so many other topics, is simply because they have very poor taste -- that is, that they are not qualified to judge, or that their judgement is easily influenced by irrelevant factors (like popularity).

The reason that the art establishment is dismissive about quality or "taste" is a bit more nefarious, and at least as banal -- they are not good at producing art. So they denigrate that which they know is better than they can achieve.

And by their influence (and based upon their degree of control over the opinion-shaping levers) the majority end up rejecting quality -- or being persuaded to reject their own sense of taste.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#205

Wrote professionally about taste in a previous life. It is related more closely than we expect to techne or competence from physical knowledge. When we think of poor taste, we tend to think of symbols that are separated from their function and meaning, where instead of representing that, "I do this thing," something gaudy says, "I have this thing!" That's what crassness is, and it comes down to our relative apprehens…

I think this is very wrong, and the foundation of modernism in art and architecture (which is to say, you are wrong in a very unoriginal way!) The Greeks used all sorts of forced perspective tricks in their architecture. Columns aren't equally spaced and lines aren't straight, but when viewed by a human observer at ground level the buildings built to Greek aesthetic rules appear "nicer" than those built to pure geome…

I replied to another comment related, but the anti- version of modernism is of course post-modernism, where nothing is real and everything is mainly its symbolic value. The conceit of that argument is that aesthetics are somehow trivial because anyone can appreciate them but very few can produce them - whereas you take anything post-modern and everyone can produce them but almost nobody can appreciate them sincerely.

The unspoken but founding lie of post-modernity is that criticism is equivalent to competence, and that critics are the equals of performers, but there's just all this false consciousness standing in the way that we can solve by indoctrinating people into narrative anyway. The whole enterprise is predicated on this original deception, and once you have accepted that, you can accept anything, which is why I think they teach it to undergrads.

The authenticity of "primitive" art as being a reaction to the skill and western artifice remains controversial, as if the art does not express the skill of the artist, what does it represent? Not everything has to represent something, but art is purely representation, so if it's not representing skill, there isn't a lot left.

There is certainly an anti-competence movement borne out of critical theories that need for competence to be isolated, as competence and risk are sources of truth themselves* and this physical truth competes with critical narrative, so on this, I don't know that it's a bridgable gulf.

This may be the most important part:

I think po-mo thinkers exist in a simulation founded on that base deception, and they try to convince others that their story (made of language!) is the substrate of our reality, but every time someone gets on a motorcycle, skis down a mountain, prevails over an MMA opponent, hunts food, rides a horse, jumps out of a plane, has sex for pleasure, or has some other peak human experience, the simulation disappears. All the neuroticism that forms the hall of mirrors of false equivalencies, evaporates, and what remains is gravity and time, the physical and the real, and our aesthetic experience of it.

That era has not ended, I'd argue criticism is just telling stories in a very shallow tide pool of history.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#206

Probably a heretical thing to say here but I feel like PG has increasingly fallen into the trap where because he's been smart and insightful in some areas he's gradually convinced himself he's smart and insightful everywhere. IMO the more he veers away from writing on e.g. coding and startups the more he comes across like a very over-confident man who thinks he's figured it all out It's quite noticeable on Twitter to…

PG hasn't changed in those respects. He was always interested in everything (well, a lot of things - I've never heard him care about music, for example) and always had the style you're talking about, which has always rubbed some people the wrong way for whatever reason.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#207
There is definitely such a thing as good taste.

I used to work in ultra-high end restaurants (think World's 50 Best). All the cooks are incredibly skilled. But only a small amount of them make good chefs, usually the ones who travel and eat out lots themselves. Many simply had no idea what ingredient combinations are good or bad, even if they could execute a recipe extremely well. I did make it as a chef, ish, got some awards, but the economics are tough, I took a few breaks to travel and go back to school. Working on a few other things. I still do consulting for restaurateurs I know just because I can.

When you look at the top of the top chefs, the difference comes down to taste. They all have the same skills. The best simply make better combinations.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#208

As others have mentioned, Bourdieu would like a word with him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_(book) Graham seems to be conflating skill with taste. The artists he mentions are skilled at art and he states that he is not. Distinguishing between skilled and unskilled work may be "good taste" but what is considered good art is more than just skill.

> Graham seems to be conflating skill with taste I came here to type this sentence almost word for word. I think this divide is most easily seen in the realm of acting, with no better example than Nicholas Cage: high skill level, low taste, at least judging by the majority of projects he chooses. (The counterargument might be that he realizes he's making a lot of bad movies and just needs the paycheck – he's infamous…

You have a point--just because Rush's music is technically sound, that does not mean it is good music.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#209

It amazes me when people seem to lack taste. I'm not even saying the ability to rank items in a way that agrees to some general standard. I'm saying the ability to notice that there is even a difference. I'll talk about taste in the literal sense but this extends to everything. I remember being at a Chinese restaurant with some friends where we were eating scallion pancakes. I said, boastfully, that my family makes b…

This always bothers me specifically about music. I don't claim to have some universal say on what is good and bad music, there is tons of music out there which I think is tasteful but I simply don't like.

But like 10% of music let's say is absolute garbage, mostly top 40 stuff made from cosntructed bands with some models as front men, written by a team constructed by a label to create the most generically likeable music possible, edited to the point where it doesn't matter that the models are bad singers.

This music seems to account for about 90% of global music consumption as far as I can tell. I've been traveling around the world for many years and it get's depressing when you are in some remote jungle somewhere that feels like your finally off the beaten path and you get to some little shack restaurant / bar and they have One Direction on the radio. You can't fucking escape it. I've had times where I was on 3 continents on 3 months and you here the exact same garbage music regardless of location. It's crazy how ubiquitous it is.

And there is so much good music out there. If anything we are in a golden age in terms of volume of quality independent music being produced. And yet a vast majority of people seem to have no problem listening to the bottom of the barrel junk for a majority of the music they listen to.

Re: Is there such a thing as good taste?

#210
post #107

As others have mentioned, Bourdieu would like a word with him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_(book) Graham seems to be conflating skill with taste. The artists he mentions are skilled at art and he states that he is not. Distinguishing between skilled and unskilled work may be "good taste" but what is considered good art is more than just skill.

What other considerations are there other than skill? Isn’t everything a skill? Graham lists a few other extraneous concerns that people judge art by. He asserts these are unrelated to the art itself, like which museum the art is hanging in. I agree with Graham’s premise. My theory is that people don’t believe good taste exists because most people have bad taste and that’s too big of a pill to swallow. Would you rath…

> My theory is that people don’t believe good taste exists because most people have bad taste

This breaks down pretty quickly outside of fine art criticism. If I put 20 people in a room and only one of them has dressed "in good taste", they'll stick out badly enough that the consensus of the group will be that the one is in "bad taste".

The problem is that "taste" is vague, depends on ephemeral context and may be subject to popular whims and ignorance.

Post reply on HN