Popular & Unpopular Tastes

[sailornyanko]

Originally Posted by seba_boi

... But most of the times, I just think "overhyped"... For example, Lost In Translation---hate this movie ever so much... HATE IT--thanx to the hype!...

You're not alone, I REALLY hated this film as well. It's one of the few films me and my best friend Vicente agree to hate together. I so wished I could swat that dumb woman with a frying pan to be slouching all day half naked whereas tons of people would almost give a kidney to go to Japan for 1 day!!! She gets to be there at a 5 star hotell virtually for free doing whatever she pleases. I hate her.

---

I don't know, I like what I like and that's it. I enjoy trying out other people's tastes in music. Because of that, I got myself introduced to a lot of music bands and artists I like (like lesser known groups like Mago de Oz which I swear I'm gonna buy their Gaea album when I get the 20 dollars needed for it or popular music like Juanes).

I hate listening to the radio cuse they put a lot of junk, but they do ocasionally put stuff I do actually like (like Juanes, I really like his music). I also like Alex Syntec who is another very popular artist but I don't like him because his music is hip (actually, he hasn't produced anything in about 2 years), I like his music and that's it. I'm also considering to buy a cd of his best hits.. when I get the money. Thanks to some free exposure from a classmate, I also got to like Ricardo Arjona. His new CD is really good and rather cheap at only 15 dollars. I'd love to buy it. The lyrics in some of his songs is beyond hilarious.

Strangely, I have some strange tastes in music. I hate cumbia music, but there's just some cumbia songs I love and don't know why. Maybe because the lyrics are so freakin ridiculous. Songs like: El colesterol, Goloza, la niña fresa, el ven'ao and to a point I do like la gasolina because it's such a stupid song. They are all songs for nacos but I like them. haha

A few weeks ago I heard the most idiotic cumbia song on a bus and now I can't get the lyrics out of my head!!! AHHH! Am I liking this song? O_o' I'm truely a masochist.

A lot of music I like is beyond it's days of being fashionable. I still like Phil Collins despite the mockey I recieve from my sister. Strange that at the same time, I like trance music. It's just completely contradictory.

I'm not really into jazz music, but I guess that's because of lack of exposure to it. It's not a popular genre where I live. I also love classical music. Schubert is my favorite composer. I tend to like dramatic classical music.

As for movies, ehh.. A lot of my favorite movies are hated by most people. I have yet to find people that like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as much as I.

[Haro!]

Originally Posted by sailornyanko

I hate listening to the radio cuse they put a lot of junk, but they do ocasionally put stuff I do actually like (like Juanes, I really like his music). I also like Alex Syntec who is another very popular artist but I don't like him because his music is hip (actually, he hasn't produced anything in about 2 years), I like his music and that's it. I'm also considering to buy a cd of his best hits.. when I get the money. Thanks to some free exposure from a classmate, I also got to like Ricardo Arjona. His new CD is really good and rather cheap at only 15 dollars. I'd love to buy it. The lyrics in some of his songs is beyond hilarious.

You mean like "pinguinos en la cama"?

[sailornyanko]

lol, yeah, Ricardo sings songs about the most ... random things ever. I really like his song about the Prostitute, he makes it sound sexy. Kinda has a bit of a tango feel to it.

[Perperikon010]

Originally Posted by Reidar

And how was this supposed to prove your point? The assertion you made had nothing to do with what I said was pathetic. The people who make up "popular opinion" don't have an opinion on things they've overlooked because "overlook" means "failure to notice or consider". That's a non-sequitur in your refutement.

What I was trying to say is that they overlook it because it doesn’t fall within the category of what the majority of people like, or is sold and marketed to them. Perhaps overlook wasn’t the correct word to use, but that’s how I see it. They don’t take notice of “fringe” things because they consistently stay with the mainstream. They don’t try them out because they don’t fit in with a preconceived stereotype of what they “like” or are made to believe they like. In a way they have their specific reasons to not notice it – mainly it doesn’t fit in with an image or trend they conform to.

I prefer to explore things other people miss for those reasons, in order to see what is overlooked or shunned by mainstream marketing.

Oh, and refutement is not a real word.

Originally Posted by Mel

As I see it, you're being judgmental of mainstream media and mentally lumping everything and anything popular all together into one big group as if they were all "formulaic." As in, they were all "formulated" following a strictly set procedure.

Well, they are. Most things are undeniably similar, as popular is what the majority likes and marketing companies are all too eager to endorse what once was liked. Examples are Movies that have multiple series (I Know What You Did Last Summer et al.), Pop icons that sound and look almost the same, rap videos...the list goes on. They rely on a formula that appeals to the m***** and the variations are minute.

Originally Posted by Mel

Liking something =/= thinking of something.

No one in their right mind would think before deciding to like something; they either like it or they don't, technically, anyway. Either that or they're simply indifferent. Thought or rationality don't fit into this particular equation since it has everything to do with one's personal taste, but nothing to do with one's thought process.

Just so you know, there is no discrete "aesthetic sense" like the olfactory one for instance. What you like is determined not only by the external stimuli you receive, but mostly by their processing done via your brain. Also, the way you perceive all things depends on your culture, knowledge mass and individual associations. It has everything to do with your thought process, you just are not conscious of it.

Originally Posted by Mel

Also, of course I know that you didn't say you liked something just because it wasn't mainstream. Though, seeing as how you've clearly made it a point to deliberately go against the mainstream, it certainly seems to be the case.

Not at all, your inference is wrong.

Originally Posted by Mel

You seem to be trying to go against "popular opinion" just for the sake of being a "distinct" individual when non-conformists are similar to conformists in the way that they both like something just because it is "popular" or "unpopular."

That is a faulty generalization you're making. What you're saying is something along these lines:

Popularity caters to the m*****
Nonconformists go against the m*****
Therefore they are popular because they cater to their own mass.

That mate, is a logical fallacy.

Originally Posted by Mel

You can only truly be an individualist (neither a conformist or non-conformist) when you've set aside your personal agendum of purposely going against popular opinion and just like something because you like it. (To quote Reidar: "I just like what I like.") Popularity of said something doesn't come into play, here, at all.

I don't see why individualism and non-conformism are mutually exclusive. To me that makes no sense.

Originally Posted by Mel

Despite all that explaining you did, I still fail to see why you've brought up this particular philosophy of yours.

This happens to be a "Popular and unpopular tastes" thread...

[Fobb]

So far, everyone that said they don't follow popular opinion needs to look at this:

So many people say this, it becomes popular opinion. And even so, you have to have seen it being done somewhere for you to begin liking what you do in the first place. It's not very likely you go out and invent something brand new that has never been done before just because you don't want to do what everyone else is doing. So no matter what, 9 times out of 10 you are following the popular opinion of one group of people.

[Perperikon010]

Originally Posted by PublikEnemy187

So far, everyone that said they don't follow popular opinion needs to look at this:

So many people say this, it becomes popular opinion. And even so, you have to have seen it being done somewhere for you to begin liking what you do in the first place. It's not very likely you go out and invent something brand new that has never been done before just because you don't want to do what everyone else is doing. So no matter what, 9 times out of 10 you are following the popular opinion of one group of people.

Please read the first post which states:

Originally Posted by Pseudocode

Is your enjoyment of a particular interest (i.e. movies, anime, hobbies, or food) motivated because a majority of people like the same thing?

Majority being the key word. Not the majority of a group that likes this or that certain thing, as that would be rather silly.

[Reidar]

Originally Posted by Perperikon010

What I was trying to say is that they overlook it because it doesn’t fall within the category of what the majority of people like, or is sold and marketed to them. Perhaps overlook wasn’t the correct word to use, but that’s how I see it. They don’t take notice of “fringe” things because they consistently stay with the mainstream. They don’t try them out because they don’t fit in with a preconceived stereotype of what they “like” or are made to believe they like. In a way they have their specific reasons to not notice it – mainly it doesn’t fit in with an image or trend they conform to.

If they don't notice it and/or try them out, they have no assertive opinion on it.

I prefer to explore things other people miss for those reasons, in order to see what is overlooked or shunned by mainstream marketing.

Your entire point is one big strawman; you're making up points yourself and then, in turn, arguing against them.

I never said anything about looking into overlooked (or any synonym of it) areas. I said: "...I don't actively make it a point to go against popular opinion. That would be pathetic."

If they've overlooked something and failed to take notice of it, the people who make up the "popular opinion" have no opinion about it because it's been ignored.

Your case isn't going against popular opinion, it's going against a lack of opinion. It's the complete opposite of what I said.

Oh, and refutement is not a real word.

Stop getting your term usages from dictionary.com. Dialect is an evolving process. "Refutement" is recognized vernacular.

[Fobb]

There is always a majority of people that like what you do. There is a majority of people who like wiping with moist toilets. There is a majority of people who think Democracy is the devil.

[Pseudocode]

Originally Posted by Perperikon010

Please read the first post which states:

Is your enjoyment of a particular interest (i.e. movies, anime, hobbies, or food) motivated because a majority of people like the same thing?

Majority being the key word. Not the majority of a group that likes this or that certain thing, as that would be rather silly.

That is true. Note that I did not make the distinction between mainstream/non-mainstream in the OP (though I do apologize if it seemed ambiguous with what I was really trying to address).

I guess you could say that I was asking this in a more subjective angle, of if one feels that what they like is more unique to them than with others. Certainly it is hard to actually make an objective benchmark to claim what is or is not mainstream: Do you have to refer to response polls, how much air-time does a certain interest have to be broadcasted to the public, or if you have to hear about it so many times to label somthing being mainstream?

Thus, when I say majority, it's simply in a matter of context (relating to how your tastes react with friends, co-workers, critic\reviewers, etc).

What I mentioned earlier is that I can be happy if I am among many who appreciate the same things I appreciate. The difference here, aside from the issue of conformity, is that I don't have a presupposition, or previous knowledge of any interest being popular or unpopular - rather the interests develop individually and "collides" as one notices differing opinions. Of course when realizing this, one person might feel a little intimidated because the differing opinions may outweigh his or her own (such as in my case sometimes).

Though all that's been said on this thread, including the issue of trying to conform based on any sort of pressure, are indeed valid in explaining the big picture of differing tastes and how you would react to them.

[Fobb]

I think the main reason there is so much arguement is just because you didn't define popular and unpopular. Things should go smoothly now.

[Reinas]

No. I don't care whether my tastes coincide with others. If I like it, I like it.

[Rain]

Originally Posted by Perperikon010

Well, they are. Most things are undeniably similar, as popular is what the majority likes and marketing companies are all too eager to endorse what once was liked. Examples are Movies that have multiple series (I Know What You Did Last Summer et al.), Pop icons that sound and look almost the same, rap videos...the list goes on. They rely on a formula that appeals to the m***** and the variations are minute.

A lot of 'popular' and 'unpopular' things are undeniably similar; however, that doesn't mean that they're all "formulaic."

Just so you know, there is no discrete "aesthetic sense" like the olfactory one for instance. What you like is determined not only by the external stimuli you receive, but mostly by their processing done via your brain. Also, the way you perceive all things depends on your culture, knowledge mass and individual associations. It has everything to do with your thought process, you just are not conscious of it.

Since you put it that way... yeah, there is no "aesthetic sense," so to speak. There is a standard of taste, though.

Aesthetics (perception by means of the senses) is synonymous to the Philosophy of Art (Beauty and Perception,) but requires no thought process. Responding to external stimuli isn't thinking. That would be like saying that if you poked an earthworm and it responded to this stimulus, it was "thinking" by moving away. In which case it'd only be "sensory-emotional intelligence" at best. Even then, that's stretching it a bit.

Aesthetic judgments are made based on aesthetic experiences. The concept that all experience is aesthetic experience is based on the perspective that all experience is perception.

Conclusion: it has everything to do with our perceptions of art by means of our senses of intrinsic/aesthetic value, but nothing to do with our thought processes.

That is a faulty generalization you're making. What you're saying is something along these lines:

Popularity caters to the m*****
Nonconformists go against the m*****
Therefore they are popular because they cater to their own mass.

That mate, is a logical fallacy.

I never said anything about how non-conformists were popular or unpopular. To me, there is no logical fallacy because you misinterpreted my post. Also, popularity caters to the m*****? ...What?

Technically, non-conformists don't go against the m*****. They merely refuse to conform to the socially-approved norm.

You, on the other hand, make it a conscious effort to go against the m***** by not only refusing to conform to said norm, but also by going against "popular opinion" (including people who've overlooked these unpopular things who have no decisive opinion, no less) by deliberately seeking out unpopular things and liking them. I'm sure that there are non-conformists who like "popular" art, too.

The difference is that they don't actively make it a point to go against the m***** (popular opinion). Sure, they refuse to be bound by accepted beliefs, mores etc., but that isn't the same as determinedly going against popular opinion just for the sake of being a non-conformist or "individualistic."

I don't see why individualism and non-conformism are mutually exclusive. To me that makes no sense.

Non-conformists refuse to conform to some norm while individualists express an independence of thought and/or actions. Individualists are also opposed to external interferences with an individual's choices; non-conformists let external factors get in the way of individualism by "condemning" the norm.

So, in short, individualists could care less about what is or isn't considered the norm while non-conformists can't.

...Actually, what do you mean by mutually exclusive? They both can't be true logically? Or do you mean that one can't be an individualist and a non-conformist simultaneously, whaaaat? I've assumed that you took it to mean that you don't see why they are so different.