Stealing from Klosterman 3

Q:

Assume everything about your musical tastes was reversed overnight. Everything you once loved, you now hate; everything you once hated, you now love. For example, if your favorite band has always been R.E.M., they will suddenly sound awful to you; they will become the band you dislike the most. By the same token, if you've never been remotely interested in the word of Yes and Jethro Tull, those two groups will instantly seem fascinating. If you generally dislike jazz today, you'll generally like jazz tomorrow. If you currently consider the first album by Veruca Salt to be slightly above average, you will abruptly fint it to be slightly below average. Everything will become its opposite, but everything will remain in balance (and the rest of your personality will remain unchanged). So - in all likelihood - you won't love music any less (or any more) than you do right now. There will still be artists you love and who make you happy; they will merely be all the artists you currently find unlistenable.

Now, I conceded that this transformation would make you unhappy.

But explain why.


This transformation would make me unhappy because of a fundamental flaw in the question. It's unreasonable to assume that you could change something so intrinsic without affecting "the rest of my personality". Part of the way that I see myself comes from my musical taste. It is a major part of my self-reflection.

And that's the point being made here. Why do we consider something like artistic taste to have such a high impact on how we see ourselves? After all, art is subjective, but we have trouble operating at that level. There's nothing to suggest that art isn't completely subjective, but as soon as someone says something contrary to our taste, we'll defend it with honor. Some of us, anyway. Others don't mind too much. Oddly enough, this instinct transcends artistic taste. Consider someone who collects records and listens to indie music (like me) and someone who only listens to Top 40 radio plays and has a Maroon 5 poster on his/her (probably her) wall. Make fun of The Mars Volta, and my first instinct is to defend them. But make fun of The Backstreet Boys, and our second person would have the same reaction.

Because we're defending ourselves by defending our tastes.

But if all art is subjective, it shouldn't matter. Part of us knows this and still gets defensive about it because art reflects who we are. We want to portray a certain personality by showcasing who we enjoy listening to.

That's why switching our tastes around would make us unhappy. It would, theoretically, change our self-perception from what it is now to its complete opposite. And who would like that?

I'm trying to come to terms with the subjectivity of it all. To try and rise above the idea of defending bands I like in favor for being neutral and just enjoying.

But even in doing that, I recognize that it's shaping my self-perception. I'm trading elitism for an even stronger version.

And, you know, Jethro Tull really isn't that bad.