Today in class we discussed quality. Whether quality is something that can be defined, or whether it is an innate sense with no need of definition. As knowledge increases within a subject, the ability to detect quality is honed, and that without quality is filtered. When we are new, we lack discretion, often unable to discern quality in music, in movies, in books. As we gather information, we dispose of the mediocre--the sappy ballad hacks, the cut and dry "B" films, the Grishams. Slowly we gain appreciation for the un-played notes of jazz. We value the way auteurs control every aspect of their films. As artists, we begin to seek subtlety in color and form, shun the obvious for the challenging solution, and create layers of depth within our pieces.
We watched several commercials and videos today that different people had interpreted as possessing quality. One in particular seemed to capture the class. This is a commercial released recently. I won't mention the company (it is shown at the end) because I don't want you to have any forethought when watching.
If, in general, people in similar circles of interest develop very similar concepts of quality, can we say that quality is defined by our surroundings? Or is quality something that develops in the way in which a body develops? Is quality relative, or absolute?