I’ve been thinking a lot about personal taste. What does it mean to know your own tastes? When does something go from “doesn’t work for me” to “objectively bad”?

Media criticism is a fascinating field. There’s some level of implied prestige that comes from making a thing and suggesting something to others, whether that’s praise or a roast. But there’s also a bit of ego implied in making general claims about something’s quality. It’s also somewhat implied that any sort of recommendation or review is the opinion of the reviewer/critic—even if sometimes those thoughts are treated as some kind of objective fact.

I want to make the argument for messier recommendations. By that, I mean a reviewer can love something, you check it out and don’t like it. But that’s okay too. We need to reframe recommendations and our personal experiences with media as less of “they said it was good, but it was actually trash” into more of “I checked this out and learned these specific things aren’t for me”. I’m going to mostly be talking about books, but this can apply to movies, video games, art, and so on.

Everyone is an individual with their own unique tastes and preferences, likes and dislikes. So, it would make sense that every recommendation isn’t a hit with literally everyone, especially if people are finding specific issues with things.

People making recommendations also need to examine specific elements of things so they can give helpful recommendations. Vague platitudes about vibes and general quality might not be as helpful for people who know their tastes. Vague works when trying to get mass appeal, but that’s not really doing the audience justice.

As people making things, we should try and give the hypothetical reader/viewer/listener a clear picture of what they’re actually signing up for.

Tangentially related, I’d say that more intricate reviews aren’t for everyone. Creators have to find an audience and go for them. Some people want bullets and blurbs, some want a blog post. It’s all relative. This variety of recommendation formats is a chance for viewers to look for creators who present suggestions in ways that they enjoy; another chance to examine their own tastes.

I think if you’re partway through something and unsure how you feel about it, try and articulate why. You may like it, you may not. But either way, you’ll have a better idea of the things you enjoy or what doesn’t work for you. Whether you DNF (did not finish) or not is up to you but thinking about what didn’t work will help for the next thing you pick up.

Specifically for books that don’t resonate with you, try to articulate which specific elements, plot moments, or kinds of characters didn’t do it for you. This sort of reflection will help you ask more informed questions next time you see a recommendation you consider checking out.

For example, if someone really doesn’t enjoy dual POV perspectives in stories, read something else. There is no shortage of books. There’s something to be said about the clownery of wanting hyper-specific recommendations from parasocial reviewer-viewer relationships, but it is beyond the scope of this essay. Maybe later though.

"Life is too short to read bad books...", in the sense that there’s no point in checking something out if it wasn’t cosigned by someone else—implying quality via second opinion. I wonder, is expecting others to perfectly know your individual tastes not a waste of time too? Help yourself by learning what does and doesn't work for you. Learning something isn’t your thing isn’t inherently a waste of time; it’s data for next time.

A recommendation is ultimately a suggestion; if you like this, you might like this. It is not, or it shouldn’t be presented, “this is great, literally everyone will like this”. Using this sort of framing can make all recommendations useful in some way. Even the ones that make you want to skip a work because it doesn’t sound like your thing. That’s an important part of refining your own tastes too.

An intergenerational story of a daughter, mother, and grandmother as they learn how they came to be the way they are and the hurt they unknowingly carry between generations. It’s about dichotomies: the South/East Coast, millennials/Gen X, Black people/white people. It’s messy and it’s sad. I adore this book.

A novel about feeling aimless in life and accepting the ugliest parts of yourself in order to heal. The protagonist is a mess and being stuck in her head while she comes to terms with the kind of person she wants to be was exactly what I needed at the time. Also, there’s an octopus.

A collection of poems on topics like transphobia, sex work, queer elders, and hatred written like love letters to the undeserving. Kai Cheng Thom handles subject matter that could easily veer into naivete with a level of clarity and empathy that I still think about sometimes.

If you end up checking any of these out, please let me know what you did or didn’t like. Thank you for reading.