On my wide range of taste:
On Monday night I watched Pretty Little Liars and The Lying Game.
Earlier this month I watched the entire first season of Game of Thrones.
Last night I finally discovered Downton Abbey.
Two of those shows are multiple-award winners. Two of them are not. I'll let you figure out which.
Sometimes I worry - well, no. Worry is not the correct word, because that implies that there's a probability that I will let preconceptions determine in what I do and do not indulge in the pop culture arena. So let me rephrase: sometimes I wonder about my television, film, book and music tastes and how there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of rhyme or reason behind them.
For example, I love Game of Thrones and Downton Abbey. I recognized the brilliance in Homeland but bailed after two episodes because I just couldn't get into it. I love J.J. Abrams but couldn't get into Person of Interest after half a season - and yet almost instantaneously loved his latest, Alcatraz. I liked American Horror Story, The Killing and The Walking Dead yet have no desire to watch Mad Men or Breaking Bad.
I adore critically-acclaimed comedies like Modern Family and New Girl but can't get into critically-acclaimed comedies like Community (which, admittedly, I liked until this season) or 30 Rock.
My weekly to-watch list includes an Emmy winner like The Good Wife and the pop cultural phenomenon that is Glee, but The Vampire Diaries is second only to Glee in my must-watch hierarchy each week.
I've seen seven of the nine contenders for Best Picture in the upcoming Academy Awards, and they were all extremely good, but Crazy Stupid Love was still my favorite movie of 2011.
I read almost exclusively YA last season.
Again - other people's perceptions of what someone with "good taste" should or shouldn't be partaking in don't concern me, really. I mean, sure, sometimes I wonder why I do or don't like and how that lines up (or doesn't, in many cases) with what's en vogue. But it's just a general wonderment.
Which leads me to my next random topic: snobbery.
I have written off all manner of things because I let someone else's opinions - and often my own pre-conceived notions - determine what I should or shouldn't like. I've gotten much better at further exploration before making a final decision.
I guess that's why it annoys me when others do the same.
Last week I was hanging out in the Starbucks attached to my favorite Barnes & Noble. I didn't intend to eavesdrop - I mean, I was trying to read my own book. But the women sitting behind me weren't exactly using indoor voices and when I heard one of them mention one of Sarah Dessen's books and then proceed with some pretentious rant about contemporary Young Adult fiction in general, I gave up any pretense of not listening.
What she should've said was: "I don't like contemporary YA." That's it. No big deal - we all have our own preferences. But no. She was talking about how she just can't read novels about "high school kids" (I assume she was about my age) because she can't identify with them, then in the same breath praised The Hunger Games.
Okay. The can't-identify thing is just a ridiculously stupid generalization. There are universal themes of belonging, identity, self-worth, triumph, despair, tragedy and overcoming adversity that are represented in so many excellent books, regardless of genre. John Green's books - all of which feature 16- or 17-year-olds - have been highly praised for their deep and enduring themes since his debut. I haven't been 17 in a while, and yet I still deeply identify with all of his protagonists. With all of Sarah Dessen's characters. With Jay Asher's Thirteen Reasons Why. Just to name a few.
Scout Finch? Eight years old. Huckleberry Finn? Eleven years old. Holden Caulfield? Seventeen years old. To Kill a Mockingbird, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Catcher in the Rye would be classified as Young Adult if they'd been written today, and yet they've been studied and heralded for decades.
To say that you can't identify with and subsequently dismiss an entire genre because of an age difference alone is ludicrous. (I don't think I need to point out the fact that in the same sentence, this woman then raved about The Hunger Games. I love The Hunger Games. But Katniss Everdeen is - you guessed it, 17. And also living in an unimaginable future. To say that you can't identify with contemporary themes but variations of those same themes in a futuristic and dystopian world resonate? Again with the ridiculosity.)
I've learned not to set limits on myself and I'm certainly doing much better at avoiding generalities. For instance, I don't love YA paranormal as much as I used to, but I'm certainly not going to swear off an entire genre. Same goes with music, TV, movies, and anything else, really.
Which leads to my final topic of the night: passion.
I was watching some of Luka Šulić and Stjepan Hauser's amazing cello work on YouTube yesterday and it is so apparent just how passionate they are about their music. It's not just something they do for fun - or now, as a way to merely earn a living - this is who they are.
I've always had such a connection to the music I listen to, the books I read, what I watch, etc.: the lyrics to Mumford & Sons' "After the Storm." A particular bit of phrasing in Paper Towns. Monet's The Avenue. The sweeping cinematography and orchestral swell of War Horse - I've never known how to passively engage. I mean, is it even possible to engage without some sort of personal investment?
It's way too late for any of this to be anything but disjointed and rambling, but if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that perhaps this last topic is the underlying thread to the whole post.
Anyway. I have no idea why I felt the need to write about any of this.
Just did.




