I was reading another post on a book that discussed Parkerization and found myself getting into the familiar cultural dilemma of natural versus enhanced.
We were discussing the tools winemakers sometimes use in making wine to suit different goals.
Bring in the breast implants.
Sure, there are horrible things to be said about media pressure on what bodies should look like and how that leads to armies of same-looking people going through plastic surgery to conform with the media (and consumers) pressure. Still, I am a big fan of some of the results.
I read somewhere that Art is the careful manipulation of the viewer's emotions.
I love natural beauty, but I still find it hard to harshly condemn enhancements that produce beautiful (if less natural) results.
The problem that I find is with consumers denying their effect in the standarisation of tastes (what is popular versus what is beautiful in its own special way). Who makes something popular? The media who publish about it or the people that watch/read the media and support those views?
Care to chime in?
Breat implants and wine
- Reply by Chris Carpita, Jul 1, 2008.
I think that people in the media have a very good sense of how public popularity works, and they provide the second half of a feedback loop that generates as many impressions as possible. To some extent, popularity can be planned, and masses can be deceived for short periods of time into a feedback loop.
Tastes are standardized because there are so many needs for a consumer that they can't keep track of multiple options for each and every need. At some point, they want to know what the best "thing" is for a particular category, and not deviate from that source until they become dissatisfied, or become aware of something significantly better. Even people who enjoy diversity on an intellectual level will fall into this habit, because it is a practical need.
- Reply by oceank8, Jul 3, 2008.
I am reading "The Battle for WIne and Love: or How I Saved the World from Parkerization" and am feeling the same way as hipergas. The author talks about wine makers enhancing their wines and making them all the same and how much she dislikes that. I agree that "natural" unaltered wines can be great, but that doesn't mean that an altered wine is bad. I enjoy my big fruity California wines. They are popular for a reason and it is not ONLY because Parker gave a wine a 90+ rating. Yes, he definitely influences people but he got where he is because a lot of people agree with his palate.
I don't like someone trying to make me feel bad because I enjoy mainstream wines. They can be fantastic (as can boob jobs - how did that get into a wine thread)! I can see a wine maker wanting to make what sells, sounds smart to me, and as the consumer, I enjoy it.
- Reply by Philip James, Jul 3, 2008.
haha - yeah, no idea how fake boobs made it onto Snooth, but its a very visual comparison.
I'm from the countryside (i grew up on farm land in the UK) and i love unadulterated beauty, but i live in NYC, and have learnt to appreciate a lot of noisy, homogenized, well produced things too. Sometimes i like my wine rustic, earthy and traditional and sometimes i want a bottle of alcoholic fruit juice, neither is wrong, and i think its good that we toe that line here on snooth!
PS. i had a bottle of very nice box wine while on vacation that i'll be reviewing soon.