Much like how one outgrows their childhood disgust for broccoli or how one eventually learns to appreciate the flavor of hops in emerging adulthood, I’m a firm believer that one’s artistic taste need not be manufactured but rather fostered. And much like the perpetual question that drives the study of psychology—whether we, as human beings, are driven to think the way that we think due to nature or nurture—the answer often points to both factors. However, I err on the side of the latter being the majority influence in this case. I wanted to make that clear before I go on a bit of a rant for this week’s post on a video by dark academia aficionado and fledgling novelist R.C. Waldun where he provided three bits of advice on how one can develop their artistic tastes:

1. Nobody cares about your taste—so go ahead and enjoy what you enjoy.

2. Know how and where to find the artists that interest you.

3. Maintain some level of regular curiosity for further taste development.

While I don’t disagree with the core ideas of what Waldun mentions throughout his video, I do disagree about the underlying prerequisite mentality that comes with this approach and the way that he goes about applying these teachings in his own life. That is to say that I am not a fan of the notion that one’s creative palette be centered around doubling down on what a person likes alone as it neglects the importance of knowing one’s personal dislikes and actual mental growth.

Waldun mentioned something that he coined as “The Dinner Table Test” in which, according to him, if you find yourself talking about a creative work analytically, logically justifying why you like a certain thing, that’s probably a sign that you don’t love it enough to emotionally attach yourself to the work. Inversely, if you find yourself motor-mouthing about a thing, that’s a sign that you’re truly invested in the work that you’re consuming.

Now, set his lapse of judgement aside, I would like to firmly disagree with his assessment—just take a look at the majority of the online fanbase for Netflix’s hit series Arcane. Not only do those conditional statements have a great likelihood of overlapping that the they might as well be a merging highway ramp, but they also undermine the value of critical thinking in conventionally creative spaces such as literature, film and television, video games, etc. Because by reflecting and analyzing something that you appreciate, that does not dampen or weaken your adoration for said item—in fact, it’s quite the opposite and actually carries some sentiment for Waldun’s first bit of advice. Yes, nobody cares about your taste—but it’s very important that you exercise some brain power to understand why you like or dislike something in the first place. Just be sure to not impose your opinions onto other people—this is something that a lot of people forget when just communicating ideas in general and it’s very rude and annoying to say the least. You’re simply expressing your appreciation or disdain—your overall experience with a work—in a succinct manner to a random public which, in some cases, can be considered an artistic move itself if not an act of bravery in an era of normalized cowardice. Exposing yourself to differing opinions is crucial to artistic development, lest you begin to subsist on your own ego, and it seems Waldun forgot that.

With all of that said, don’t let yourself be confined to diving deep into reading content by authors you appreciate. Hell, the majority of my high school personal reading consisted of going through many of the works of John Green who seems like a great guy but definitely not the best writer in my opinion. I remember spending a lot of my time wondering why The Fault in Our Stars was as big as it was at the peak of its popularity what with its uncharacteristic dialogue and its peculiarities. Like, who the fuck lets their terminally-ill daughter to travel with some Ansel Elgort-looking schmuck (yeah, I watched the movie too) across Europe with minimal supervision after maybe a couple of weeks of knowing each other? Yeah, I get that their clocks are ticking faster than everyone else’s but that was quite a risky dice roll with all things considered (then again, it has been a while since I read it so I could be forgetting a couple of things).

Sorry for the rant. The point I’m trying to make here is that from reading literature that I didn’t particularly deem as “good”, I was then able to learn from it and explain what I would like to see in a novel which subsequently was applied to my own writing.

And as far as remaining curious, yes, I agree with the general idea. Let life work its magic by letting it convene with the relative unknown and universal entropy to create the conditions necessary for you to discover a collection of Christina Rossetti’s poetry at your local bookstore. However, do it all within reason—I direct this statement specifically to readers who reside in the US—because in this economy, you need not to dice roll a good read if you have your suspicions. Do your research, check out a couple of reviews, but don’t let that dictate your final decision. If you want to throw caution to the wind and make that risk, go ahead and commit to it—but do know that it’s probably within your best interest to get the most out of your finite time here on earth by making sure that your free time is ensured to be a satisfying and/or beneficial experience.

Now, some of y’all might be wondering at this point and asking why I’m bothering to comment on this guy’s video in the first place. Well, for one, I’m sure that, as someone who heavily identifies as an academic, that Waldun would be more than happy to oblige a pseudo-sophist as myself who has done nothing more than disagreed with certain particularities in a video about artistic taste—no ad hominem, nothing bunk, no hidden agendas, I’m just trying my best to keep my gripes within the content of the video itself. Why? Because I find argumentation—true argumentation, none of that pundit shouting match schlock—important for both the growth of the affirmative and the negative. A wise teacher from my undergrad days taught me that the goal of a debate is never to win but to find common ground—but all parties involved must be willing to do their share in searching for resolutions in a discussion. And on that note, I will conclude my rant and leave this post up for discussion. I’m sure that there are many other hypothetical counter-claims to provide rebuttals to but, to be quite frank, I’ve been writing for three hours straight re-reading and making sure that this thing is readable. So, instead, I’ll be enjoying lechon with a glass of red wine, maybe waiting for engagement.

All Caps Madvillain, Madlib, MF DOOM Tastes by Tyrone B.

Thank you for reading this edition of The Morning Owl. If you liked what you saw here, please leave a like, subscribe, leave a comment, and share this newsletter. Until we meet again, do take care.

Share