Common opinions--what's at work?

I have always found that the general consensus and the rock critics have pretty well always been correct - because it's so obvious.
It's always people with poor taste in music who can't get their head round it.

 

You misspelled "different".

 

You're right. I forgot - everything is awesome.

 

Who's to judge why someone's taste is, "poor'?? A great example is Robert Christgau's reviews on Jethro Tull back in the day; so, because they're my favorite 70's band I have poor taste?

 

Now you sound like my mother, taking what I say to an illogical, extreme conclusion. You're better than that, PJ.

 

So you don't think "poor taste" in something can exist?

 

Who is the arbiter of this "poor taste"? Is it the "unwashed masses"? The "intellectual elite"? Those who deem their own taste as "good"? This culture or that culture?

This is from wiki, but it does kind of nail it for me:
In sociology, taste is an individual's personal and cultural patterns of choice and preference. Taste is drawing distinctions between things such as styles, manners, consumer goods, and works of art and relating to these. Social inquiry of taste is about the human ability to judge what is beautiful, good, and proper.
Social and cultural phenomena concerning taste are closely associated to social relations and dynamics between people. The concept of social taste is therefore rarely separated from its accompanying sociological concepts. An understanding of taste as something that is expressed in actions between people helps to perceive many social phenomena that would otherwise be inconceivable.

So yeah, in music there's no such thing.

 

Why do people read reviews, whether for a album, restaurant, a mattress, or whatever ... because they want to see what other people like. If a person knows nothing about a band and wants to inquire where to start buying albums from that band on SH, I doubt that person is going to start with the album that the majority says sucks.

 

Objectivity heard On opinion is in reality Subjectivity. All discussions about which band or artist is better of which album is better or worse is Subjectivity.

 

Just chiming in that I was hoping this didn't become another subjective vs. objective discussion. That's not really what I'm asking about.

It's more of a "nature vs nurture" question as someone noted earlier. Or simply, to what extent do we think opinions are socially influenced versus not socially influenced.

That's why I used the idea of raising people with zero knowledge of others' opinions. Just to what extent would people have the same opinions in that situation? I don't see that as a subjective vs. objective issue. (I could explain why in some detail, but I want to avoid getting into that.)

 

The idea of "poor taste" is ridiculous, but I don't want to sidetrack the thread. We could start another thread about that.

 

One of the main reasons I used to read reviews was to try to glean some factual/descriptive info about albums, films, etc. so that I could get a good idea whether it might be worth me checking something out (based on my self-knowledge re what I was interested in, what usually appealed to me, etc.). I didn't care about the reviewer's opinions. I just wanted to know some basic info re what a film was about, what the album sounded like, etc.--this was in the days before the Internet, when reviews were a good way to hear about new releases.

Now when I read reviews, I'm primarily interested in other folks' interpretations, little things they noticed that maybe I didn't catch, factual/background info that I wasn't aware of . . . stuff like that. Unless I know the writer personally, I don't really care whether they liked or disliked whatever it is, although I have some interest in the sorts of things that people like or dislike, partially just because I'm interested in the psychology of preferences/tastes--which is also what's behind this thread.

 

Nurture. Sometimes nature. But mostly nurture.

 

I know that that's the diplomatic position to take, but do you honestly believe it? You don't think that people who uniformly love music that you think sucks, and simultaneously hate music that you think is great either have, a). poor taste in music, or b). limited mental faculties?

I'll give a non-musical example.

A couple of years ago I saw that one of my favorite films of the past 20-years was on cable. Ronin. It features great cast including Robert DeNiro and Jean Reno. John Frankenheimer pretty much reinvented the action film car chase with the "wrong way through Parisian highways" sequence (copied endlessly since 1998). Cable info gave the movie a 1-star rating. I mean, the worst Adam Sandler film would get 2 or 3-stars.

Why just 1-star? Because it's an espionage "buddy" film with an unconsummated romantic subplot? Because the exact contents of the suitcase that everyone is pursuing are never revealed? Because the cold-blooded Russian oligarch lets his Ice Capades girlfriend get assassinated rather than part with a wad of cash? Because the film is set in France and the sun never shines during any of the daytime scenes? Who knows?

I can understand that the movie might not make everyone's Top Ten for 1998, but the reviewer who gave it 1-star is a certified nitwit with non-existent "taste" in cinema. And they're doing it for a "living."

 

I usually go out of my way to avoid popular opinion, but once in awhile our opinions mesh. Its just one of those things.

And for the record, I like Pablo Honey.

 

Obviously, it’s a different mixture of individualism vs. environment for each person. I grew up with 4 older siblings. They were constantly giving me records and playing different things for me to listen to. I picked up different artists and genres from each of them, and that became the nucleus of my collection and my tastes. However, I would also hear things on the radio that only I liked, and ultimately started buying records that didn’t fit into any of their musical universes (Elvis Costello, for example). I think people come to this forum for the environment aspect of music collecting. They want recommendations and lists of favorites to check out. There’s a lot of very knowledgeable older siblings types here who love to share...emphasis on older (myself included).

 

I also love Ronin by the way.

 

I have my own opinions, and they can be changed, since I have a functioning mind.

Whatever other people think, or what is considered "common", is irrelevant to me in the formation of my own tastes.

 

You make a compelling argument, but I still disagree. Tastes are different, not better or worse.

 

Another common opinion that annoys me:

Workingman's Dead and American Beauty are the only good GD studio albums. I guess they never listened to Aoxomoxoa, Wake of the Flood, Mars Hotel or Blues For Allah.

 

This is a perfect example of social influence at work.

 

This disregards the first part in the process which is the choosing of the album/artist that we are going to subject to examination of our functioning mind from which we will for an opinion.

The process
Robert Christgau is a brilliant music critic.
He has just written a very positive review on an album by an artist I've never heard before.
That album must be good.
I need to listen to that album.

Was Robert Christgau's review correct ?
That is your opinion.

Robert Christgau's review provided the nudge that lead you towards listening to that album.
This is a example of social influence at work.

Without the nudge you wouldn't have chosen that album to listen to. Think of the thousands & thousands of albums that you haven't listened to because social opinion has never steered you towards listening to them. The worst thing some of them are great.

 

Most people believing that Tapestry is the only good Carole King album is what convinces me that it's social influence.
I also think that many Pink Floyd fans who don't like or even hate Dark Side of the Moon would like it if it wasn't so famous.

 

Yes but if it wasn't so popular less people would like it (think about it)

Dark Side of the Moon is the only Pink Floyd I really like. I do like bits & pieces of some of the other albums but not whole albums.
Is this due to social influences. Initially yes. It's popularity is why I gave it another chance. Same thing didn't work with The Wall.

 

I agree about that. Main thing I was focusing on was people having to think for themselves & how influence can go both ways. I know people who have bought albums for a single or two & they'll say that those are the only good ones after listening to it, but then they end up liking the future singles and act like they've always liked them. There are also people who say that the only good songs on Pet Sounds are the singles that they are familiar with.