A Matter of Taste

A lot of trends come and go in the art world. As a result, many people find themselves confronted by art that they do not understand or appreciate at some point or another. Some people then bite their tongues, assuming that they do not know enough to discern good from bad, while others lament the fact that they don't "get it" and that money and resources were spent in the creation of art they consider to be in poor taste. But what is in good taste and what is in poor taste? Where do the lines between them blur? Where does taste come into play?

People in different cultures develop different tastes and aesthetics. Some groups are drawn to certain colors and sounds over others. Different groups prefer certain compositions, layouts and thought patterns used to rationalize ideas to others as well, and these are also influenced by and reflected in the cultures in which we live. There are all kinds of inherent biases that greatly affect the arts as a whole. I have discussed this somewhat in regards to beauty before.

Some artists and institutions strongly encourage art as a means of pursuing high culture in order to seek the epitome of art and the perfection of form and technique. But what is typically considered high culture often shows an inherent bias towards those in power, if for no other reason than because those with status and money are afforded more opportunities to pursue the perfection of man. As a result, high culture can be seen as elitist and is thought by some to be outdated in that it imposes such a bias.

In contrast, popular culture (sometimes specifically referred to as low culture) is more mainstream and appeals to the masses. Some artists work within popular culture, often while being self-referential or commenting on society. As more and more artists have embraced popular culture, the distinctions between high and low culture have become more and more blurred. Several artists have even used popular culture as a means of questioning the idea of high art, for all that some scholars believe these sort of educated references are lost on the masses. This then brings up the question of marketing. To whom are these works really being marketed?

I don't really know where exactly I am going with this, except that I don't think everything should be limited to solely one sensibility. How bland would the world then be, to only have one flavor? There are many things which I consider to be in poor taste because they go against my own sense of morality and so I question their relevance and necessity. But I do not believe that it is my place to judge these sorts of things on behalf of everyone here. For one thing, I have already determined in the course of my lifetime that I respond to different things than many of those around me. Between my offbeat sense of humor and overeager enthusiasm for approaching things differently, for all that this is rarely my intent, I am fully aware that my sense of taste is not at all indicative of what others would even want.

So for all that I do have a sense of what I like and respond to, as all of us do, I am glad that mine is not the only sensibility out there because I think that the world is far more interesting and diverse the more people are allowed to express themselves. I may not like everything that's out there, but that doesn't mean that I cannot appreciate it in some way. We foster, encourage and promote creativity as a whole by allowing people the freedom to voice themselves. If we start to limit what is and isn't art based upon what is in good taste, especially those things that cause no harm onto others at all, then we only serve to limit ourselves as well. As artists, that can be a very dangerous road to tread because we can inadvertently stifle our own creativity in the process.