There's no accounting for Taste.....

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

With clothes you do largely get what you pay for. A œ100 shirt will look a lot nicer than a œ15 shirt. The better materials used can be clearly seen. I get lots of comments on the shirts I wear, whereas other people don't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Nah - that's tosh, quite frankly. Paying œ100 for a shirt and you're just paying for a name, just to have it say 'Ralph Lauren' or even, god forbid, 'Paul Smith' on the side.
Cotton's cotton, polyester's polyester - and polycotton is just a mixture of the two - therefore ASDA cotton is just the same as an expensive brand name's cotton.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

But it all depends if you want to pay œ100 for a shirt I suppose. To me, I like looking my best and am happy to pay for the quality and style that goes with it. Others (most people!) clearly don't see it as important which is fair enough.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
They're probably commenting because they've seen the label, because they want to be seen as the sort of people who recognise expensive clothes, even if they don't wear them themselves.
I will admit 'designer' clothes sometimes come in styles that you can't find in budget ones - my little brother gets designer clothes all the time and some of them do look really nice and you probably couldn't emulate them from budget alternatives, but in most cases you ARE paying for the label mainly.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

papercorn2000 · June 2007

I bought a made to measure shirt in Vietnam. It cost more than a shirt would here but if I'd bought it in the UK...

Anyway, it had no label and several people complimented me on it. And then I ripped it on a door handle. Aaaaaagh!

God told me to skin you alive.
http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by papercorn2000

...I didn't know that about Pollock but I have to say that I like looking at his pictures!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">No, no, it was Hirst who got an E for...

ah, you're winding me up [:)]

Joe Sacco · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

With clothes you do largely get what you pay for. A œ100 shirt will look a lot nicer than a œ15 shirt. The better materials used can be clearly seen. I get lots of comments on the shirts I wear, whereas other people don't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Nah - that's tosh, quite frankly. Paying œ100 for a shirt and you're just paying for a name, just to have it say 'Ralph Lauren' or even, god forbid, 'Paul Smith' on the side.
Cotton's cotton, polyester's polyester - and polycotton is just a mixture of the two - therefore ASDA cotton is just the same as an expensive brand name's cotton.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Joe Sacco

But it all depends if you want to pay œ100 for a shirt I suppose. To me, I like looking my best and am happy to pay for the quality and style that goes with it. Others (most people!) clearly don't see it as important which is fair enough.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
They're probably commenting because they've seen the label, because they want to be seen as the sort of people who recognise expensive clothes, even if they don't wear them themselves.
I will admit 'designer' clothes sometimes come in styles that you can't find in budget ones - my little brother gets designer clothes all the time and some of them do look really nice and you probably couldn't emulate them from budget alternatives, but in most cases you ARE paying for the label mainly.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Clearly you haven't got a clue on this one. My shirts do not have labels on them, and cotton is not cotton. I think any explanation of different shirt qualities would be lost on you so I won't be bothering. All I can suggest is that you look and feel a Sea Island 140 cotton shirt and compare it to that Asda shirt. I think you may be in for a surprise....

Gary Askwith · June 2007

Taste is intimately would up with quality as Rigid raider reminded us
As an indulgence here is my personal all time (so far) favourite highest quality writer, a sage-genius who i keep returning to time and again [^]

[url][/url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_W._Watts[url][/url]

Here are two snippets from The Joyous cosmology 1962

Decision can be completely paralyzed by the sudden realization that there is no way of having good without evil, or that it is impossible to act upon reliable authority without choosing, from your own inexperience, to do so. If sanity implies madness and faith doubt, am I basically a psychotic pretending to be sane, a blithering terrified idiot who manages, temporarily, to put on an act of being self-possessed? I begin to see my whole life as a masterpiece of duplicity-the confused, helpless, hungry, and hideously sensitive little embryo at the root of me having learned, step by step, to comply, placate, bully, wheedle, flatter, bluff, and cheat my way into being taken for a person of competence and reliability. For when it really comes down to it, what do any of us know?

I trace myself back through the labyrinth of my brain, through the innumerable turns by which I have ringed myself off and, by perpetual circling, obliterated the original trail whereby I entered this forest. Back through the tunnels-through the devious status-and-survival strategy of adult life, through the interminable passages which we remember in dreams-all the streets we have ever traveled, the corridors of schools, the winding pathways between the legs of tables and chairs where one crawled as a child, the tight and bloody exit from the womb, the fountainous surge through the channel of the penis, the timeless wanderings through ducts and spongy caverns. Down and back through ever-narrowing tubes to the point where the passage itself is the traveler-a thin string of molecules going through the trial and error of getting itself into the right order to be a unit of organic life. Relentlessly back and back through endless and whirling dances in the astronomically proportioned spaces which surround the original nuclei of the world, the centers of centers, as remotely distant on the inside as the nebulae beyond our galaxy on the outside.

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

babyjebus · June 2007

You certainly have appalling taste in writers, if you consider that overwrought gibberish to possess any qualities beyond unnecessary obfuscation. [imagine relevant emoticon here]

Each to their own of course, and thanks for the warning.

Flying_Monkey · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary Askwith
Class
Dali
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Slick overrated toss...

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Crass:
Pollock
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Rather similar to Dali really, in the sense that he just repeated what was successful over and over again... at least he had the good sense to die fairly young and not hang about getting more and more ridiculous as he got older.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Class:
The Singing Detective
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I never understand why Potter is so lauded, I'm afraid. He's the TV writer's TV writer is the only explanation I can come up with. Large network of admirers in the meeja.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Crass:
X-Files
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The first few series were postmodern genius, which then declined into dubious and unimaginative mainline story... much like Buffy, it was probably way cleverer than most of its fans and rather too successful in its commentary on contemporary subcultures for most of its critics.

I'd agree with you on much of the rest though...

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

simoncp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Arch

In your ideal world then, these arts wouldn't be subsidised, and no one from an ordinary or poor background would even have the chance to find out if they were interested or not... And those of us who are, would instead just have to know our place and watch Big Brother all day.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

An art form that requires subsidy obviously cannot finance itself from interested people of any financial background, rich or poor. Why should the tax cash of all the poor, and everyone else, be used to subsidise the hobby of a tiny minority, be they rich or poor?

Anyone concerned about poverty should be against arts subsidy. Ending it would give a few extra pounds back to every single poor person, while possibly denying a very few poor people access to their beloved art form. Overall, many more poor people would benefit than lose out for the simple reason that hardly anyone, rich, poor or middling, is interested in the subsidised art forms. The audience figures prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Simon L2 · June 2007

As a professional aesthete, tasked with visiting my taste on the hapless public.....[:D]

I'd start with Kant's definition of 'purposiveness without purpose'. Does the object, or the setting, take you to an idea of what is useful? Skip the art object thing (for the moment, but it's far too easy to respond too quickly) and look at landscape. I'd hazard a guess that taking joy from the appearance of 'the countryside' is part of the pleasure that most of us gain from cycling.

Some of us are inspired by landscapes that are sublime - the heather clad Scottish uplands, or Dungeness. Some look to landscapes that are more composed - a valley in the Weald, or watermeadows in Essex. Some will be moved by the formal arrangement of Stourhead or Rowsham. In each of these there are different ideas. The Scottish highlands might speak of the awesome strength of creation, and our oneness in confronting that creation. The valley in the Weald might speak of security, continuity and the fecundity of nature. The garden at Stourhead might speak of craft or a devotion to beauty. It doesn't matter whether you agree with any of that, by the way - my point is that there is an analysis that can be made that deals with association. To go back (foolishly) to the art object - a Pollock (or a Mondrian) might speak of the intense relationship between bodily movement and the bright, artificial colours of the modern world, and the desire within the modern world to encode things in to two dimensions, thus (sorry[:I]) reducing it to something which is clearly a defined object. Again, it doesn't matter if you disagree with that - all I'm saying is that if you think about it you might find some way of understanding your own perceptions.

The interesting thing is that all of this is manufactured. The reason I chose landscape is that there is nothing more manufactured, and the response of the British and Germans to landscape, while intense, is based on fictions. The Scottish landscape is the product of land ownership and the clearances - the very isolation of it is the story of people going to Panama to die or to Viginia to (eventually) prosper. The valley in the Weald is a real-life representative of a style of landscape painting which typically has a tree or stand of trees to the side a gentle U-shaped valley in the middle and a cottage or some evidence of cultivation standing in as representative of human activity - you see the middle classes of the eighteenth century colonising the countryside, enclosing land and, simultaneously, setting up an entirely fake romantic history of the simple life. And Stourhead, with it's razed grass, perfectly owned land is the ultimate Whig kleptocracy art object in which the common people are replaced by altogether more satisfactory nymphs and fauns marshalled by the great minds of history.

Again - there is a sense in which none of this matters. Happily we can take other people's images and make them our own. The plate your granny owned with a picture of a thatched cottage on it, or the picture of the stag at bay. The coach party to Blenheim. These things can become ours, and when I'm wheeling down the A286 I'm no less transported by the 'beauty' of what I see for knowing the barbarity that lies beneath it. And in that love there is a kind of strength. It does us good to see things and think them beautiful, however poor others think them, because that impulse is a fine impulse.

The trouble starts when some prick draws a bloody great skyscraper because he thinks it's beautiful....[:D]

Simon L2 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by simoncp
Overall, many more poor people would benefit than lose out for the simple reason that hardly anyone, rich, poor or middling, is interested in the subsidised art forms. The audience figures prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
my unfortunate near-namesake has clearly never been to the opera. Every time I go it's packed out. And that's if I can get a ticket...
And going round the recent Donald Judd exhibition at the Tate was like being in the queue at Tescos.

Jaded · June 2007

SominL2, I too find the sight of watermelons in Essex somewhat uplifting.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Simon L2 · June 2007

well don't sink your teeth into them! They're well siliconed!

simoncp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Simon L2

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by simoncp
Overall, many more poor people would benefit than lose out for the simple reason that hardly anyone, rich, poor or middling, is interested in the subsidised art forms. The audience figures prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
my unfortunate near-namesake has clearly never been to the opera. Every time I go it's packed out. And that's if I can get a ticket...

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'd be more inclined to think that opera was an entertainment worthy of my consideration if I knew that people were prepared to pay full whack to go and see it. As it is, I know that even the affluent middle classes who make up the vast bulk of opera audiences need to be enticed by tickets partially paid for by whole population. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the art form.

ankev1 · June 2007

This is probably the most difficult and nebulous topic we've ever had on Soapbox. The only thing I can come up with is that your expression of your taste should probably stay within your own cultural boundaries. For the British, this has traditionally meant a sort of dignified, classy understatement. This is why Johnny Foreigner invariably looks cheap and flash (e.g. Italians, French and any other Latino types) or just crass, scruffy and flash (Americans and those who ape them, which sad to say these days includes increasing numbers of Brits).

What is definitely tasteless is wearing or owning something with the chief intent of impressing others. If what you have incidentally impresses others then that is OK.

The key thing is to be tolerant. That said wearers of baseball hats, shellsuits and football tops should probably be shot on the spot.

Uncle Mort · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

This is probably the most difficult and nebulous topic we've ever had on Soapbox. The only thing I can come up with is that your expression of your taste should probably stay within your own cultural boundaries. For the British, this has traditionally meant a sort of dignified, classy understatement. This is why Johnny Foreigner invariably looks cheap and flash (e.g. Italians, French and any other Latino types) or just crass, scruffy and flash (Americans and those who ape them, which sad to say these days includes increasing numbers of Brits).

What is definitely tasteless is wearing or owning something with the chief intent of impressing others. If what you have incidentally impresses others then that is OK.

The key thing is to be tolerant. That said wearers of baseball hats, shellsuits and football tops should probably be shot on the spot.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

__________________
In his mid forties and still unusual

Ankev, how long is it since you've been back to the UK?

If you apply your last rule you'd take out about a third of the population of many English counties.

ankev1 · June 2007

Excellent! Overpopulation problem solved with a single counter-sartorial stroke!

515mm · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

This is probably the most difficult and nebulous topic we've ever had on Soapbox. The only thing I can come up with is that your expression of your taste should probably stay within your own cultural boundaries. For the British, this has traditionally meant a sort of dignified, classy understatement. This is why Johnny Foreigner invariably looks cheap and flash (e.g. Italians, French and any other Latino types) or just crass, scruffy and flash (Americans and those who ape them, which sad to say these days includes increasing numbers of Brits).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

See! I knew Rapha was best.

*ducks behind (tastefully artisan pointed) parapet*

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ the enemy is anybody who is going to get you killed, no matter which side they're on...

redcogs · June 2007

Anyone seen 'Pan's Labyrinth'?

please look up to the stars.. ***

515mm · June 2007

B@llocksed up that signature. Basket laptop. Do as ewer told!

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ the enemy is anybody who is going to get you killed, no matter which side they're on...

515mm · June 2007

Redcogs

Always meant to - it had a fantastic review from El Ross. Worth a look, IYHO?

Apologies to everyone for the sig thing. Had a junior moment there.

redcogs · June 2007

Essential but traumatic viewing.

please look up to the stars.. ***

515mm · June 2007

Then I shall track a copy down. Not sure if mrs515mm will enjoy(?endure?) the trauma though. She prefers kittens to most things....

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ the enemy is anybody who is going to get you killed, no matter which side they're on...

ankev1 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by redcogs

Anyone seen 'Pan's Labyrinth'?

please look up to the stars.. ***
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Is that something to do with Pan's People? You know you're going to have to explain this now.

redcogs · June 2007

Just a very good thought provoking film from Spain Ankev. Pan's People were a rather sexy ('pending on your view) dance troop phenomenon from days of yore were they not?

please look up to the stars.. ***

Gary Askwith · June 2007

I notice no-one else has dared to put their tastes on the chopping block for the attention of the Aesthetic mafia....[;)]
Go on chickens.........[}:)]

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

ankev1 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary Askwith

I notice no-one else has dared to put their tastes on the chopping block for the attention of the Aesthetic mafia....[;)]
Go on chickens.........[}:)]

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Irresistable.

Casual: Rohan and similar.

Formal: Timeless, classy, understatement. (Shame I never seem to get to wear my dinner jacket these days.)

Uncle Mort · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary Askwith

I notice no-one else has dared to put their tastes on the chopping block for the attention of the Aesthetic mafia....[;)]
Go on chickens.........[}:)]

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

One's bicycle clips have to be brown.

__________________
In his mid forties and still unusual

Flying_Monkey · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary Askwith

I notice no-one else has dared to put their tastes on the chopping block for the attention of the Aesthetic mafia....[;)]
Go on chickens.........[}:)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I just can't always make clear divisions between class and crass, Gaz, so it's difficult...

Let's take just music.

What I listen to is wide-ranging, including mediaeval choral, baroque, Armenian folk songs, early modern composers, bebop, 60s garage and pschedelia, 70s Soul, nu-wave, American alternative, old skool hip-hop, noisecore, experimental instrument makers and more.

Grandaddy, Bach, Michael Franti, Can, Stravinsky, John Coltrane, Curtis Mayfield, The Specials, Pixies, Beach Boys, Love, Sunn

), Bartok, The Seeds, Public Enemy, Bjork, XTC, Rachmaninov, Talking Heads, Fela Kuti, Velvet Underground, John Taverner, Surjan Stevens, Maximo Park, Sam Cooke, Djavan Gasparan, Silver Jews, Wire, Esbjorn Svensson Trio, Lightening Bolt, Common...

I hate mainstream country and western, but I love alt-country. I find most opera tedious and trivial, but absolutely love Janacek's From the House of the Dead. I can't sit through ballet even though I understand the skill and physicality involved. I can't stand most contemporary pop and RnB, but like Liberty X's 'Just a Little Bit More'...

More 'class' than 'crass' or vice-versa... I don't know, I tend to make an effort to give anything a go first time around and that's all I can do...

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Flying_Monkey

What I listen to is wide-ranging, including mediaeval choral, baroque, Armenian folk songs, early modern composers, bebop, 60s garage and pschedelia, 70s Soul, nu-wave, American alternative, old skool hip-hop, noisecore, experimental instrument makers and more.

Grandaddy, Bach, Michael Franti, Can, Stravinsky, John Coltrane, Curtis Mayfield, The Specials, Pixies, Beach Boys, Love, Sunn ), Bartok, The Seeds, Public Enemy, Bjork, XTC, Rachmaninov, Talking Heads, Fela Kuti, Velvet Underground, John Taverner, Surjan Stevens, Maximo Park, Sam Cooke, Djavan Gasparan, Silver Jews, Wire, Esbjorn Svensson Trio, Lightening Bolt, Common...

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I listen to Abba. [:)]

Gary Askwith · June 2007

If only I had time to flay the sword......[;)]
Full marks for stravinsky, Bartok, be bop, 6o's psychedelia (early floyd I presume)....
Surprised by omission by association of, for example, mamas and papas, the smiths, madness?
Wheres Debussy Ravel mussorgsky prokofiev authentic american 50's sun inspired rockabilly???[:0][?]

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

There's no accounting for Taste.....

Comments

Categories