> I question whether or not those tastes are a sign of objective quality, or just something they've been conditioned to think of as good.
I mean, that’s kinda a different question right? Like it’s not “objectively good” as in “you’re objectively wrong if you don’t like it.” It’s “objectively good” as in “there are objective standards that have been agreed upon by a large group of people.”
> Is everyone insane or is there something I'm missing.
Difference in taste based on class-related norms & values, mostly, is what I'd say you're missing. Can make a thing really impressive/desirable to one group of people, and simultaneously gauche/disgusting to another.
>It's good because people think it's good. They think it is good because of cultural/narrative reasons. It's not good for any underlying or objective reason.
> You say it’s trivial to have good taste, but it’s not trivial at all.
I 100% agree. "Good taste" is just another phrase that means "style that I prefer". There is no such thing as an objective ideal of good taste. It's all about human preferences, and that gets very complicated very quickly.
>For me it's the question, why it's so hard to understand that people have different likings without to downgrade them?
Because while everyone can have this or that preferences, personal taste is not the be all end all argument, except in the "it's a free country" way.
Whenever we want to assess the state of our tools, and what we need to make them better etc, we need to reach an agreement beyond "works for me" and personal taste.
Subjective as in it's up to the individual person whether it likes or doesn't like something.
But it can also be of objectively variable quality (eg. someone liking Vanilla Ice's work who can't stand Bach or Coltrane).
Taste is not something passive and "everything goes" just because it's subjective. It's also something that can be cultivated (even in food -- imaging someone crazy about Hot Pockets, McDonalds and Taco Bell, who doesn't like cooked food because it "tastes bad"). It's a little heresy to say that someone's individual taste is not sacrosanct but can be objectively crap in the US, but it's much more acceptable in good ole Europe.
> They may have a different taste, but that taste is no better or worse than anyone else's.
This is often repeated like it's some universal truth. Enjoying a film (or anything) doesn't mean it's great - this is a very hard to explain idea though, as it's something that is experienced in the core of your being. It's like trying to explain why small talk is important to someone from a low-context culture - there's probably a fundamental disconnect where it will never make sense. Although I can explain it with words, it really only makes sense on an emotional level. It's the difference between criticism by The Needle Drops and Lester Bangs. One is focused only on "objectivity" - "slashing guitars and crunchy snares"; the other is weaving a story.
But I guarantee you that anyone with the ability to convincingly articulate why The Office is better than Rebels of the Neon God isn't arguing in good faith. And there's a reason for that.
No, that's not what they're suggesting. That's a straw man that begs the question. They're suggesting there's no such thing objectively. Not everyone agrees on what's great because it's subjective and different people value different things. You're trying to reify your taste and in the process confounding your subjective values whith objective values (which can't exist.) PG does the same thing in one of his essays, whereupon this was repeatedly pointed out.
> Is it that hard to separate 'I like' from 'is good'?
This is a trend I've noticed particularly on Reddit, but it's probably growing elsewhere too. As if everything is purely subjective, and we cannot talk about objective quality at all.
It's a childish view being literally unable to look beyond "I like it", and it's anti-intellectual bullshit, a total rejection of the value of expertise and experience.
You make a couple of good points, but I think it's again down to your personal situation and taste that makes it "boil down" to these points.
reply