My friend Jen and I frequently shop together and we always laugh over the fact that we have such completely different taste in fashion and style. I was at her house the other night she happened upon the picture of the Louboutin shoe I featured last post and she told me that she didn't care for it. My first reaction is always shock since I can't understand how anyone could not care for the shoes I love, but then I remembered that it is Jen and we have very different taste. I teased her recently by telling her that I liked a very tacky shoe that cost over $1000. She believed me because she hated it. Well, even she gets it right every now and then.
I actually like the fact that Suz and I have different taste in shoes. It gives life a richer texture when there are such variations in beauty. I don't happen to like Monet but I do love Pollock. And you know what? that's perfectly fine. There is a philosophical school of thought that believes that tastes cannot be disputed. I think that may be taking things too far. If that were the case, then a child's hand print in purple paint would be as worthy of the Met as a color splashed Kandinsky. That is unfair, isn't it? So, the question remains: how do we decide who gets to decide what is good and what is not good?
I have a simple solution: let's do it by love and passion. If you love and admire velvet paintings, you get to decide which ones are good. If you love and admire shoes and your name is either Liesl or Suz, you get to decide which ones are good. When Suz and I disagree we can call it the difference between preferring Picasso to Renoir; they are both masters, both worthy of adoration, but they don't appeal to the same people. That's a good solution. So, are you a Lieslist or a Suzist?
How much do you want to bet Jen doesn't like these shoes:
Dolce and Gabbana
Tuesday, December 12, 2006