Taste

I find the idea of trying to actually give a standard to taste to be extremely comical. Consider my current circumstance. As I am reading an passage that is defining what is tasteful I am sitting here browsing threw you tube videos. Sure I may have started watching something cool like the trailer for the new live action version of “The Legend of Zelda. And then only a few clicks later I am watching Happy Tree Friends videos. I am not sure if there is anyone who would every say that that series merits any sense of taste, but I was reading the part of the passage about Alcoran. All of the Short Happy Tree friends start off innocent and happy enough. Enough so that if you had only ever seen a few seconds of one, one would think they were most likely a happy and innocent children’s short as all the characters are supper cutesy animals that make adorable giggling sounds. Shortly after those first few seconds of watching the video, the viewer is greeted with images that can only be described in the words of David Hume, “images of inhumanity, cruelty …and bigotry”. The shorts are very much disgusting and revolting showing those previously mentioned cutesy animals being severely mutilated. Now what is odd. Is that if there was to truly be any sort of standard of taste one would assume there would only be a few of these videos. Instead as I unpleasantly discovered there are hundreds, each with thousands of views and on further investigation I have discovered that there is actually a rather large fan basis for them.

Thus I would argue that despite any practical argument that could be made about a standard of taste. I will always stand by the saying that “there is no accounting for taste”. Sure it could be possible for a minor standard of taste to come about within some sort of smallish social group but it would be impossible to establish one for the general population we have simply become too individual. In fact this individuality would be effect by not just out personal likes and dislikes but also the light that we see the art in. Take Happy Tree Friends. If say, I was with a group of friends that all found the shorts to be very comical I might laugh at them and enjoy them. But watching only a few of them by myself has left me sick to my stomach. So in that circumstance my surrendering could effect my standard of taste.

When trying to determine if the two pictures that Dr. Anderson linked are have taste. I would personally say that neither of them do and at the same time both of them do. They are both very satirical. The one of the monkey holding the flower seems to be a kind of making fun of the sophisticated person from back in the day. But as it is a monkey, the painting is most likely making some kind of satirical joke at the upper class. The other one is seems to be off a person in Shakespearian era, because of the clothing style, but instead of sitting in a respectable fashion as would have been common in portraits for that era instead is making a funny face. Thus if one considers the satirical ramifications of the works from the mindset that of understanding and appreciating the satire than their tastefulness can be appreciated but if instead the onlooker sees the working as making fun of them, they would likely find the art to be insulting and thus not tasteful.