day 52

"I often wonder where the fancy for such ridiculous stuff could come from." - Madame de Sevigne

It may or may not be surprising to the reader of my letters that I have a soft spot for ugly words, long-winded periods, bad taste, stupid pictures, pop magazines, whiny bloggers, bad literature and cheesy melodrama. I am attracted to the opposite of the good taste suggested by my references and my insistence of a restricted audience. I need stupidity, so that I can say that my good taste derives from having started from bad taste. But frankly, it is not so.

What is more intriguing? The bad acting of a Japanese pop idol (Yamapi) or the good acting of Al Pacino? I think they are one of the same thing.

How about Adachi's simple caricatures (every character in different stories looks the same) compared to the Monet's impressions? I think they will always have their lookers.

Perhaps, I don't want to make the distinction. Derrida or ChIaKi-SeNpAi? Every moment has its demands. The fundamental thing is that there will always be an audience - be it one or millions. We are bored and so the distinctions between good taste and bad are a result of that boredom.

If you think about it,

A plate of chicken rice $3 versus a Black Angus Steak $50 - the fundamental difference is the price. The taste, subjective. I won't criticise bad spending. I will only say - there is a season for bad taste and a season for good taste.

OR

There is always going to be the bewilderment that we are always going to be captivated, intrigued, attracted by something we least expect - hence grows a habit - of taste, eat, digest, shit.