DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDEM (EST)

 

This was to be one of my earliest posts that I was going to write. It is behind my reasoning to cast my letter grade ratings in terms of my own personal reactions to a work, rather than trying to create some sort of objective ratings scheme for it. (Just a reminder: Letters indicate the degree to which I personally like/dislike something. The pluses have to do with whether there are characteristics or attributes that tend to elevate or depress the perceived value of the work in question.)

The Latin expression that sums up my critical aesthetic in evaluation works is De gustibus non disputandem est. Which is usually translated (incorrectly) as: "There is no accounting for taste." Which is what the supposedly enlightened say to the perceived philistines as a put-down. But it literally translates as "There is no arguing with taste."

Or in other words: "You like what you like." Period. No arguing with that. Again, period.

And as a corollary: There is really no such thing as a "guilty pleasure." Period. You like what you like.

And it also means, that we can agree to disagree about the quality of a work. And we can both be equally right/wrong about the work. Or the question itself is meaningless. Your mileage may vary (YMMV). 

Do you follow where this leads to?

Aesthetics is generally about us trying to explain/justify the difference between what we like and don't like in some systematic, consistent way. But here's the catch: it assumes that our aesthetic responses can be described in terms of discrete groupings of works (genre), but also across the universe of discrete groupings of works (genre). Recommendation algorithms on commercial websites assume this. But I think, after some honest reflection, I think you'll realize we simply aren't.

Aesthetic responses are much more complex and contradictory than we generally recognize them to be.

Again, We like what We like. YMMV.