Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Taste (sociology)
Taste as an aesthetic, sociological, economic and anthropological concept refers to a cultural patterns of choice and preference. While taste is often understood as a biological concept, it can also be reasonably studied as a social or cultural phenomenon. Taste is about drawing distinctions between things such as styles, manners, consumer goods and works of art. 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. Some judgments concerning taste may appear more legitimate than others, but most often there is not a single conception shared by all members of society. People with individual sensibilities are not unique either. For instance, aesthetic preferences and attendance to various cultural events are associated with education and social origin. Different socioeconomic groups are likely to have different tastes, and it has been suggested that social class is one of the prominent factors structuring taste.
Taste (sociology) addressed to this community, it is not a genuine subjective judgement. Kant's idea of good taste excludes fashion, which can be understood only in its empirical form, and has no connection with the harmony of ideal consensus. There is a proposition of a universal communal voice in judgements of taste, which calls for a shared feeling among the others.[3] Bourdieu argued against Kantian view of pure aesthetics, stating that the legitimate taste of the society is the taste of the ruling class. This position also rejects the idea of genuine good taste, as the legitimate taste is merely a class taste. This idea was also proposed by Simmel, who noted that the upper classes abandon fashions as they are adopted by lower ones. This pattern is known as the trickle-down effect. Fashion in a Kantian sense is an aesthetic phenomenon and source of pleasure. For Kant, the function of fashion was merely a means of social distinction, and he excluded fashion from pure aesthetics because of its contents arbitrary nature. Simmel, following Kantian thought, recognises the usefulness of fashionable objects in its social context. For him, the function lies in the whole fashion pattern, and cannot be attributed to any single object. Fashion, for Simmel, is a tool of individuation, social distinction, and even class distinction, which are neither utilitarian or aesthetical criteria. Still, both Kant and Simmel agreed that staying out of fashion would be pointless.[4]
A more complex economic model for taste and consumption was proposed by economist Thorstein Veblen. He challenged the simple conception of man as plain consumer of his utmost necessities, and suggested that the study of the formation of tastes and consumption patterns was essential for economics. Veblen did not disregard the importance of the demand for economical system, but rather insisted on rejection of the principle of utility-maximization.[6] The classical economical conception of supply and demand must be therefore extended to accommodate a type of social interaction that is not immanent in economical paradigm. Veblen understood man as a creature with a strong instinct to emulate others to survive. As social status is in many cases at least partially based on or represented by one's property, men tend to try and match their acquisitions with those who are higher in social hierarchy.[6] In terms of taste and modern consumption this means that taste is formed in a process in of emulation: people emulate each other, which creates certain habits and preferences, which in turn contributes to consumption of certain preferred goods. Veblen's main argument concerned what he called leisure class, and it explicates the mechanism between taste, acquisition and consumption. He took his thesis of taste as an economical factor and merged it with the neoclassical
Taste (sociology) hypothesis of nonsatiety, which states that no man can ever be satisfied with his fortune. Hence, those who can afford luxuries are bound to be in a better social situation than others, because acquisition of luxuries by definition grants a good social status. This creates a demand for certain leisure goods, that are not necessities, but that, because of the current taste of the most well off, become wanted commodities.[7] In different periods of time consumption and its societal functions have varied. In 14th century England consumption had significant political element.[8] By creating an expensive luxurious aristocratic taste the Monarchy could legitimize itself in high status, and, according to the mechanism of taste and consumption, by mimicking the taste of the Royal the nobility competed for high social position. The aristocratic scheme of consumption came to an end, when industrialization made the rotation of commodities faster and prices lower, and the luxuries of the previous times became less and less indicator of social status. As production and consumption of commodities became a scale bigger, people could afford to choose from different commodities. This provided for fashion to be created in market.[8] The era of mass consumption marks yet another new kind of consumption and taste pattern. Beginning from the 18th century, this period can be characterized by increase in consumption and birth of fashion,[9] that cannot be accurately explained only by social status. More than establishing their class, people acquired goods just to consume hedonistically.[10][11] This means, that the consumer is never satisfied, but constantly seeks out novelties and tries to satisfy insatiable urge to consume. In above taste has been seen as something that presupposes consumption, as something that exists before consumer choices. In other words taste is seen as an attribute or property of a consumer or a social group. Alternative view critical to the attributative taste suggests that taste doesn't exist in itself as an attribute or a property, but instead is an activity in itself.[12] This kind of pragmatic conception of taste drives its critical momentum from the fact that individual tastes can not be observed in themselves, but rather that only physical acts can.
Taste (sociology)
Bad taste
Bad taste is generally a title given to any object or idea that does not fall within the normal social standards of the time or area. Varying from society to society and from time to time, bad taste is generally thought of as a negative thing, but also changes with each individual. Some varieties of black humor employ bad taste for its shock value, such as Pink Flamingos or Bad Taste. Similarly, some artists deliberately create vulgar or kitsch works of art to defy critical standards or social norms. Some artists argue that the only thing that is in really bad taste or that is vulgar, is the Kitsch, intended as a lack of "technical awareness". Despite the economic risks, some retailers also deliberately design and sell objects ordinarily regarded as vulgar, relying on inflated price tags to instill an Emperor's New Clothes effect amongst customers. Aristophanes, Plautus, Franois Rabelais, Laurence Sterne, and Jonathan Swift never considered "good" or "bad" taste to be a way to judge their classic works of art.
Notes
[1] Outwaite & Bottonmore 1996, p 662 [2] Gronow 1997, pp. 11, 87 [3] Gronow 1997, pp. 88-90 [4] Gronow 1997, p 83 [5] Ekelund & Hbert 1990, pp. 154-157 [6] Ekelund & Hbert 1990, p 462 [7] Ekelund & Hbert 1990, p 463 [8] McCracken 1990 [9] Bragg 25 October 2007, Taste [10] Gronow 1997, pp. 7879 [11] Campbell 1989 [12] cf. Hennion 2007 [13] Ritzer 1997 [14] Adorno & Horkheimer 1982, pp. 120167 [15] Bourdieu 1984 [16] Slater 1997, pp. 153, 156 [17] Slater 1997, p. 156 [18] [19] [20] [21] Simmel 1957 Slater 1997, pp. 154155 Bourdieu 1986 Slater 1997, pp. 159163
Taste (sociology)
[22] Slater 1997, pp. 157158 [23] Holt 1998, p. 21
References
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge. ISBN0-415-04546-0. Bourdieu, Pierre (1986). "The Forms of Capital" (http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/ works/fr/bourdieu-forms-capital.htm). In Richardson, John G. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press. ISBN0-313-23529-5. Bragg, Melvyn (25 October 2007), Taste (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0082dzm), In Our Time, BBC Radio 4, retrieved 18 September 2010 Ekelund, Jr., Robert B.; Hbert, Robert F. (1990). A History of Economic Theory and Method. 3rd ed.. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. ISBN0-07-019416-5. Gronow, Jukka (1997). Sociology of Taste. London: Routledge. ISBN0-415-13294-0. Hennion, Antoine (2007). "Those Things That Hold Us Together: Taste and Sociology." Cultural Sociology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 97-114.. London: Sage. Holt, Douglas B. (1998). "Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption?" The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Jun., 1998), pp. 1-25. Horkheimer, Max; Adorno, Theodor W (1982). Dialectic of the Enlightenment. New York: The Continuum publishing Corporation. ISBN0-8264-0093-0. Outwaite, William; Bottonmore, Tom (1996). The Blackwell Dictionary of Twentieth-Century Social Thought. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Simmel, Georg (1957). "Fashion". The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 62, No. 6 (May, 1957), pp. 541-558. Slater, Don (1997). Consumer Culture and Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. ISBN978-0-7456-0304-9. Stern, Jane; Michael Stern (1990). The Encyclopedia of Bad Taste. New York: Harper Collins. ISBN0-06-016470-0.
External links
BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0082dzm)
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/