From: yrol@invalid.fr   
      
   On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 12:18:53 GMT, "Marianne Casper"   
    wrote:   
      
   >Well, I found HE pretty painful. I didn't care for ESILY, but it wasn't as   
   >hard to watch as HE. So there it is. Proof positive that taste is   
   >subjective.   
      
   If you see Woody Allen's movies, he could say him self : it is real or not   
   real and no it is objective or subjective. It's different, very different.   
   Because his characters are always in a illusion. For example, they changed   
   taste for the prestige because a another person like a thing (Zelig), or   
   are in a llusion of love by mimetism, narcissism (see anything else). So,   
   you can love a thing but to know that this thing is not a great thing. It's   
   ok. But say that this thing is great, it's necessary to discuss about this   
   thing and his concretes elements. So, you can say taste is subjective, it's   
   so easy to say and in the mood right now to say that, but it is real or not   
   real ? And the illusion ? What do you make to the illusion ?   
      
   And remember in Anything Else :   
      
   "Falk, if a guy comes out onstage at Carnegie Hall and throws up, you can   
   always find some people who will call it art."   
   --   
   Yannick Rolandeau   
   http://yrol.free.fr/   
   "Un homme qui n'est jamais idiot n'est pas tout à fait humain"   
                       Gonzalo Torrente Ballester   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)