In and out of style

[Philosophy Explorer]

Would you say that something goes out of style due to boredom?

For example a dance called the twist was the rage in the early 1960's before other dance crazes took over. But today is a new generation who couldn't possibly get bored. So while boredom may be a factor with this example, it couldn't explain why the twist couldn't come back with this particular example, and numerous other examples. So would you say that boredom is a big factor in aesthetics? Or is it not a factor or just more complicated? And why would something be the rage at one point in time, but not be the rage at another point in time?

PhilX

[The Voice of Time]

There's no reason to believe that boredom alone is always a factor. It can be a factor, but more likely it has to do with the way things become popular to begin with: namely something gives that particular thing credibility, legitimacy, tastefulness. It can be a celebrity, it can be an authority, or it can be just a mass of individual people resorting to this thing because of some common event, like a resource shortage, or a resource boost.

For instance, why people choose to go from 1K to 4K video quality? There are of course multiple factors at play, but one of them is that prices lower, so it becomes available, and people might have experienced bad video quality before, so they have an inner anxiety for bad video quality and what it does to immersion, and then there's all the hype, people who are strong fans of film and enjoy watching things at its clearest and most impressive, and these people will influence the rest of us, over time, to lean towards this particular thing. Now 4K video quality isn't as good an example as works of culture, but it shows how accessibility and authority can help shift opinions over time, from saying "1K is good enough for me", to "look at this wonderful 4K I just bought!". In this example, the video geeks being the authority, plus the wealthy people who buy the initial TVs and therefore make it a "luxurious" item.

A reason why somebody may want to move away from a thing, is caused by the same reasons. Somebody makes a hype, because they've taken special interest, and suddenly everybody wants 8K, or people just end up going for some other aspect of the TV, and 4K lives on as an expected part of the experience, without being a big deal in itself (like how quality 3D can influence the experience).

The reason why a dance might stop being a big thing, could be caused by there being a better dance out there. Maybe a dance that is more spectacular, when people needed something spectacular, or it's easier to do, so the average person has more accessibility to it (less learning, less physical fitness necessary), or maybe people found out that the dance wasn't that much of a good thing after all (the hype dies out, like a fire extinguishing). That's not necessarily the same as boredom, so there could be a great variety of reasons.

[Dalek Prime]

I wonder how good pre-HD TV shows look on 4K? If your preference is for watching classic TV and film, which mine is, I can't imagine getting excited about it. I did spring for a new, large Samsung HD Smart TV, though. More than good enough for my needs.

[Skip]

Would you say that something goes out of style due to boredom?

Perhaps among aristocracy - or what passes for it now.

Among regular populations, fashion is usually contrived by a commercial interest: they want to sell more clothes, or eyeglasses or [gods help us!] cellphones, even though the old ones are still perfectly functional. They want to sell us more snacks and movies and other ephemera, and so they create an artificial boredom with the old.

In less hectic historical periods, fashion didn't change from one decade to the next - and then usually because something that was more convenient, more status-enhancing or pleasurable became available through trade or innovation. People are attracted to the new, even if they were not bored with the old, because they hope it will give them an advantage.

But also, yes, for the novelty itself.

For example a dance called the twist was the rage in the early 1960's before other dance crazes took over.

Adolescents want everything that's advertised at them, everything their peers like (or say they like, because they're expected to): humans are tribal and adolescents are far more intensely conformist than adults, because they have not yet earned their way into the tribal hierarchy. They need to separate from the parents and belong to their cohort. So they'll buy all the emblems of their cohort.

But today is a new generation who couldn't possibly get bored.

Has anyone told them this? Cose they often look ineffably vacuous.

it couldn't explain why the twist couldn't come back with this particular example, and numerous other examples.

The reason the twist can't come back is that it's a bad dance. The waltz never went away.

So would you say that boredom is a big factor in aesthetics?

In one sense, yes. Novelty has a very short shelf-life. It palls and becomes boring very quickly... Unless the novel thing has something more going for it. If it's also functional or intellectually challenging or soothing to the emotions or makes life easier or enhances the user's odds of finding a mate - or has some other durable virtue, novelty will be discarded for the next novelty.

Fads change; value lasts.

[Pluto]

Maybe the thing has to constantly improve or change itself into something else than it was previous. Just when you start getting bored a new improved thing takes its place. I think something is all the rage because it speaks of the time, or future, or past. There is a whale-like momentum of zeitgeist boring through time, and if you can get in its slipstream, a rage can be created. This also works to the whale's inverse other, too much of one thing for too long, creates the yearning and space for its inverse.

I can explain this further with music.

The first, which gets into the slipstream (new sounds, new technology)
New Order Blue Monday (top of the pops)

The second, the whale's inverse other, low-fi, dirty, angry, grungy, moody, anti.
Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit

Both examples to us now have lost their specificity of time. But back when they first hit the ears of the listener it was something new and almost required, needed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTb2rZ0SBg4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTWKbfoikeg

In fact here is a painting of a whale boring through time

zeitgeist of a whale boring through time.jpg (173.87 KiB) Viewed 3896 times

The Nirvana's, though the inverse or missing other of the whale, are still part of it. That perhaps is the tragedy, to escape the whale completely while still remaining relevant is as yet not known. Like the actor Clooney in Gravity, does he lose sight of the mothership only to become enveloped in total blackness. It is not yet known how a being could operate fully outside the system. Though NASA is working on it.

[Obvious Leo]

"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose"...Jean Baptiste Alphonse Karr

The more it changes, the more it remains the same thing. Some of the most ancient writers in history even pointed out that adolescents choose different modes of dress, language and general behaviour solely to distinguish themselves from their parent's generation. The same goes for their cultural preferences. They're effectively saying "We are not them" in a perfectly natural way and they imagine they do this to express their own personal individuality. In fact nothing could be further from the truth. They slavishly follow the fashion of the day solely to earn the admiration and approval of their peers, which is just simple human biology and all a part of the mating game. We all did it to a greater or lesser extent and all future generations will continue to do it for ever more. When mammals reach the reproductive phase of their lives they produce a range of different hormones and other bio-transmitters which strongly influences their cognition and thus their behaviour. It's the price of being human and who would wish it otherwise? I still enjoy reflecting on my hormone-fuelled youth with the fondest of nostalgia.

[Harbal]

In fact here is a painting of a whale boring through time

Sorry, Pluto, but you can't convince me that it's not a plate of fish and chips.

[Pluto]

You see things not as they are, but how you are. And all that crap.

[Harbal]

You see things not as they are, but how you are. And all that crap.

OK, so the fish is really a whale. I suppose I can go along with that. It's the chips I'm struggling with. So they're not really chips, or French fries, as the Americans call them, but what they really are is time. Could we compromise? Can it be a whale ploughing forward through the chips of time?

[Pluto]

If you want

[Harbal]

If you want

I knew I could talk you round. I think you're fond of me, really.

[Pluto]

yes you(re great

So, can you show the zeitgeist boring through time?

[Pluto]

It's the chips I'm struggling with. So they're not really chips, or French fries, as the Americans call them, but what they really are is time

No, the chips as you call them are those elements which fall into the slipstream of the zeitgeist (metaphor whale) and prosper and became 'all the rage' as it speaks to the time.

The time is the clock-hands and numbers, sweet jesus.

[Harbal]

zeitgeist (metaphor whale)

Why use a metaphor? Why not just paint a zeitgeist?

The time is the clock-hands and numbers

Ok, I can see that, now that you've pointed it out. They're not exactly precision instruments, though. Are they?

[Pluto]

Why not just paint a zeitgeist?

You paint it