Is taste about status, or about knowledge and appreciation? Or about expression? Is "taste" a meaningful or useful concept? Is taste style? Or preference? I don't know. It's probably all those things - and in competition variously.
One of my favorite observers of taste is that guy on twitter who talks about mens tailored clothes. It's so cool - although how he applies it to contemporary fashion, politics, news-of-the-day. I love it and read him. I can appreciate what he's saying, but I have to admit, it's not my taste. Or it's not my style. I don't want to wear that stuff. It's not me and while it might be fun to look like an English dandy for an afternoon, I wouldn't be able to maintain the bit.
My favorite concept of taste is really appreciation. To be able to see coherence and history in objects and style, in manners and interactions. And to value them even if you don't embrace them. And criticizing taste is often - maybe usually - borne out of ignorance or superficial impression. Thus curiousity and engagement, and patience, are key to appreciation.
I see what you did there Mr. Black V-Neck Tshirt Taste Man with the Midori paper journal flex. Your Perfect Days movie was the way I felt when I watched A Single Man. But to answer your question for this year, it was watching the Substance. Not a great story line but the directing and visuals, wow, I knew it was French before I saw the credits. And now I have an explanation for never understanding how some people can move through this world with no music in their life: a lack of curiosity. This actually makes sense in explaining why some people just put on clothes and others puuuuuuut on clothes. Lack of curiosity. And so true about Iris’s taste rubbing off.
I was looking forward to this one when I saw the title in my inbox - it didn’t disappoint!
To some extent, I think taste is a lack of anxiety but only because taste is a form of survival. I think we chase belonging in a way that alleviates our anxieties and black sheepness and makes us feel whole - connected in some way to society. But even this doesn’t hold up when you think of the edge case scenarios of people that truly don’t assimilate with the world, maybe for them, taste is the survival of self-knowledge and identity that goes against society.
This duality makes me think that taste, is inherently egoistical and status-oriented, as opposed to just having an identity. In having taste, we yearn to share it, or make it known, somehow. We seek validation and push our agenda, as tastemakers for the sake of anxiety or ego, nonetheless. In simply having an identity, there is no ego, no validation to be sought - self-knowledge is pre-eminent.
On another note, I’ve been slowly collecting notes on a piece titled “arbiters of quality” which analyzes the Michelin guide, Yelp reviews, JD power awards, etc as ‘tastemakers’ of a consumer world. Would love your thoughts on that, if any.
This is a deep point, and I probably need a few more days to think it through. You leave me wondering: Is it possible to develop taste independently of our parents, our friends, marketing, the culture in which we grew up, etc.?
Is Mk.gee's Two Star & the Dream Police my favorite album, independent of the culture and vibes of 2024? Or am I choosing it as my favorite album of the year to position myself somehow? Why am I wearing a denim jacket and white sneakers, and what would I be wearing if I was born in Bhutan in 1830?
I'm reminded of Relational Self Theory and its rejection of the basic notion that we have an independent self focused on personal goals and autonomy. For the relational self folks, we're more like an emergent meme — constantly refining our self-narrative based on our relationships, culture, job, etc. Maybe it's the vibes theory of the self.
And maybe the same is true of taste. There's no such thing as individual taste ... we're just a humble node in a very messy network. And I guess the concept of tastemakers recognizes that some people/brands are more influential nodes than others. There will always be leaders and followers, and status is the way we distinguish.
For your piece on tastemakers, I'm curious how it applies to politics. Growing up in the 90s, the NYT, WSJ, TV, and radio were the political tastemakers. The rest of us just talked about what they said. That's still true to a degree, but they've surely lost ground to the podcasts, substacks, influencers, etc.
I'm reminded of a short story I once read in Harper's magazine about modern feminist women in NYC who grow tired of men staring at their bodies when they wear tight-fitting clothes. So a fashion designer comes up with a very loose-fitting robe that conceals their figure. The women love it. And so they take it a step further, covering their ankles. And then their neck. Soon they are wearing a hijab and niqab with dark sunglasses so that men can't see anything and they can live peacefully.
All to say, tastemakers, marketers, and politicians are capable of incredible things. And I'd love to read a draft of your piece.
I really like that you elevated the tension between the outcomes of taste. I honestly think taste is both refinement and love for something AND it can be stating to the world “I know more of this thing than you do, thus I have more power.” Frankly, taste is both of these things the way that something like cinema is both of these things. There is great cinema that doesn’t make money and great cinema that does, and both should still be valued. But we do live in a hyper world of “tasteMAKERS” and there’s a dilution of what taste should open up. In today’s world, taste has a billions dollar economy and even that sincere curiosity and packaging of taste can seem a bit like a sell. Yet where would we be without taste? Would Joy Division exist? Would house music exist? Would Barry Jenkins exist? Would Nina Simone exist?
My taste contribution: I think Gilles Peterson is still the best music curator on the planet. Revisit some of his BBC6 playlists if you can.
My other contribution: Trader Joe’s is the worst. ;)
What I wouldn't give for a Trader Joe's in Mexico!
Man, there aren't that many people in life I can bond with over Coltrane, the aesthetics of Moonlight, Joy Division, Nina Simone, and Gilles Peterson. Great call on the BBC6 playlists. I've got 13 hours of driving ahead of me today and tomorrow and gonna download a few sets.
i agree with the above comment and that taste is a status game, it’s also a class game, and it will likely always be to some extent at its root us signaling something about ourselves. but once you learn that, what do you do with it? that’s not the only thing “taste” can be, which is what you said in your piece. i think the later part is very brushed over in many conversations, and so the importance of yes you might be signaling something, but do YOU like it, does it resonate with you, are you curious enough to go deeper, are you interrogating your choices and your biases, are you devaluing other people’s interest to feel “cool” or “superior” or are you critically thinking, etc. gets lost. it allows us to not just succumb to things mindlessly and only surface-level and dig deeper into our psyches. it is work and many people don’t want to commit or just aren’t interested in it, which isn’t a bad or good thing, but that to me seperates what it means to have taste versus not, in the way that i resonate with it, which i think you also said. i also agree that there’s no good taste or bad taste, just your personal taste.
One of the things I find compelling about your writing — that I didn't touch on here — is how you examine taste as both a representation and reaction to one's racial identity. When I was a teenager in the 90s Southern California dressed in ridiculously baggy jeans, a Charlotte Hornets jersey, and a Malcolm X hat, I was preposterously trying to conceal my racial identity. Now, when I look at my taste in fashion — Levi's, thrift store plaids, and denim jackets — it's all so generically white. It's the aesthetic captured in Mike Mill's 20th Century Women with its Volvos and desert boots and punk rock t-shirts. I love it.
I'm reminded of something I heard Zadie Smith say — in 2020, white Americans finally realized that they have a racial identity too. It's admittedly embarrassing to discover it so late in life. But better late than never.
Looking forward to your next interview and taste log.
“Taste is a cool and casual assertion of self-knowledge. It's a lack of anxiety.”
This is awesome. I also cynically wonder if it isn’t all just a status game, if that “lack of anxiety” is inherently performative. Even if it is to some degree, if you are coming from a place of genuine self-knowledge rather than chasing a socially desirable aesthetic, that feels better to me.
But maybe that’s just because to my social group, self-knowledge and confidence is high status. It’s status games all the way down, probably.
Thanks as always for sharing your thoughts and looking forward to 2025!
Totally. David Marx’s Status and Culture convinced me easily that status games are the Darwinian motor that moves culture along.
I think about it with Substack. On my less cynical days, it feels like a supportive community of thoughtful fellow wanderers introspecting together on this Long Strange Trip. But on my less generous days, it’s just another status hunger game in which we all perform for likes and subscribers to replace genuine connection.
Is taste about status, or about knowledge and appreciation? Or about expression? Is "taste" a meaningful or useful concept? Is taste style? Or preference? I don't know. It's probably all those things - and in competition variously.
One of my favorite observers of taste is that guy on twitter who talks about mens tailored clothes. It's so cool - although how he applies it to contemporary fashion, politics, news-of-the-day. I love it and read him. I can appreciate what he's saying, but I have to admit, it's not my taste. Or it's not my style. I don't want to wear that stuff. It's not me and while it might be fun to look like an English dandy for an afternoon, I wouldn't be able to maintain the bit.
My favorite concept of taste is really appreciation. To be able to see coherence and history in objects and style, in manners and interactions. And to value them even if you don't embrace them. And criticizing taste is often - maybe usually - borne out of ignorance or superficial impression. Thus curiousity and engagement, and patience, are key to appreciation.
Anyway - thanks for posting. Fun to think about.
I see what you did there Mr. Black V-Neck Tshirt Taste Man with the Midori paper journal flex. Your Perfect Days movie was the way I felt when I watched A Single Man. But to answer your question for this year, it was watching the Substance. Not a great story line but the directing and visuals, wow, I knew it was French before I saw the credits. And now I have an explanation for never understanding how some people can move through this world with no music in their life: a lack of curiosity. This actually makes sense in explaining why some people just put on clothes and others puuuuuuut on clothes. Lack of curiosity. And so true about Iris’s taste rubbing off.
I was looking forward to this one when I saw the title in my inbox - it didn’t disappoint!
To some extent, I think taste is a lack of anxiety but only because taste is a form of survival. I think we chase belonging in a way that alleviates our anxieties and black sheepness and makes us feel whole - connected in some way to society. But even this doesn’t hold up when you think of the edge case scenarios of people that truly don’t assimilate with the world, maybe for them, taste is the survival of self-knowledge and identity that goes against society.
This duality makes me think that taste, is inherently egoistical and status-oriented, as opposed to just having an identity. In having taste, we yearn to share it, or make it known, somehow. We seek validation and push our agenda, as tastemakers for the sake of anxiety or ego, nonetheless. In simply having an identity, there is no ego, no validation to be sought - self-knowledge is pre-eminent.
On another note, I’ve been slowly collecting notes on a piece titled “arbiters of quality” which analyzes the Michelin guide, Yelp reviews, JD power awards, etc as ‘tastemakers’ of a consumer world. Would love your thoughts on that, if any.
This is a deep point, and I probably need a few more days to think it through. You leave me wondering: Is it possible to develop taste independently of our parents, our friends, marketing, the culture in which we grew up, etc.?
Is Mk.gee's Two Star & the Dream Police my favorite album, independent of the culture and vibes of 2024? Or am I choosing it as my favorite album of the year to position myself somehow? Why am I wearing a denim jacket and white sneakers, and what would I be wearing if I was born in Bhutan in 1830?
I'm reminded of Relational Self Theory and its rejection of the basic notion that we have an independent self focused on personal goals and autonomy. For the relational self folks, we're more like an emergent meme — constantly refining our self-narrative based on our relationships, culture, job, etc. Maybe it's the vibes theory of the self.
And maybe the same is true of taste. There's no such thing as individual taste ... we're just a humble node in a very messy network. And I guess the concept of tastemakers recognizes that some people/brands are more influential nodes than others. There will always be leaders and followers, and status is the way we distinguish.
For your piece on tastemakers, I'm curious how it applies to politics. Growing up in the 90s, the NYT, WSJ, TV, and radio were the political tastemakers. The rest of us just talked about what they said. That's still true to a degree, but they've surely lost ground to the podcasts, substacks, influencers, etc.
I'm reminded of a short story I once read in Harper's magazine about modern feminist women in NYC who grow tired of men staring at their bodies when they wear tight-fitting clothes. So a fashion designer comes up with a very loose-fitting robe that conceals their figure. The women love it. And so they take it a step further, covering their ankles. And then their neck. Soon they are wearing a hijab and niqab with dark sunglasses so that men can't see anything and they can live peacefully.
All to say, tastemakers, marketers, and politicians are capable of incredible things. And I'd love to read a draft of your piece.
I really like that you elevated the tension between the outcomes of taste. I honestly think taste is both refinement and love for something AND it can be stating to the world “I know more of this thing than you do, thus I have more power.” Frankly, taste is both of these things the way that something like cinema is both of these things. There is great cinema that doesn’t make money and great cinema that does, and both should still be valued. But we do live in a hyper world of “tasteMAKERS” and there’s a dilution of what taste should open up. In today’s world, taste has a billions dollar economy and even that sincere curiosity and packaging of taste can seem a bit like a sell. Yet where would we be without taste? Would Joy Division exist? Would house music exist? Would Barry Jenkins exist? Would Nina Simone exist?
My taste contribution: I think Gilles Peterson is still the best music curator on the planet. Revisit some of his BBC6 playlists if you can.
My other contribution: Trader Joe’s is the worst. ;)
What I wouldn't give for a Trader Joe's in Mexico!
Man, there aren't that many people in life I can bond with over Coltrane, the aesthetics of Moonlight, Joy Division, Nina Simone, and Gilles Peterson. Great call on the BBC6 playlists. I've got 13 hours of driving ahead of me today and tomorrow and gonna download a few sets.
thanks for the mention!!
i agree with the above comment and that taste is a status game, it’s also a class game, and it will likely always be to some extent at its root us signaling something about ourselves. but once you learn that, what do you do with it? that’s not the only thing “taste” can be, which is what you said in your piece. i think the later part is very brushed over in many conversations, and so the importance of yes you might be signaling something, but do YOU like it, does it resonate with you, are you curious enough to go deeper, are you interrogating your choices and your biases, are you devaluing other people’s interest to feel “cool” or “superior” or are you critically thinking, etc. gets lost. it allows us to not just succumb to things mindlessly and only surface-level and dig deeper into our psyches. it is work and many people don’t want to commit or just aren’t interested in it, which isn’t a bad or good thing, but that to me seperates what it means to have taste versus not, in the way that i resonate with it, which i think you also said. i also agree that there’s no good taste or bad taste, just your personal taste.
lol idk if that makes sense 😭
One of the things I find compelling about your writing — that I didn't touch on here — is how you examine taste as both a representation and reaction to one's racial identity. When I was a teenager in the 90s Southern California dressed in ridiculously baggy jeans, a Charlotte Hornets jersey, and a Malcolm X hat, I was preposterously trying to conceal my racial identity. Now, when I look at my taste in fashion — Levi's, thrift store plaids, and denim jackets — it's all so generically white. It's the aesthetic captured in Mike Mill's 20th Century Women with its Volvos and desert boots and punk rock t-shirts. I love it.
I'm reminded of something I heard Zadie Smith say — in 2020, white Americans finally realized that they have a racial identity too. It's admittedly embarrassing to discover it so late in life. But better late than never.
Looking forward to your next interview and taste log.
“Taste is a cool and casual assertion of self-knowledge. It's a lack of anxiety.”
This is awesome. I also cynically wonder if it isn’t all just a status game, if that “lack of anxiety” is inherently performative. Even if it is to some degree, if you are coming from a place of genuine self-knowledge rather than chasing a socially desirable aesthetic, that feels better to me.
But maybe that’s just because to my social group, self-knowledge and confidence is high status. It’s status games all the way down, probably.
Thanks as always for sharing your thoughts and looking forward to 2025!
Totally. David Marx’s Status and Culture convinced me easily that status games are the Darwinian motor that moves culture along.
I think about it with Substack. On my less cynical days, it feels like a supportive community of thoughtful fellow wanderers introspecting together on this Long Strange Trip. But on my less generous days, it’s just another status hunger game in which we all perform for likes and subscribers to replace genuine connection.
Surely, it is both.