Roots of Musical Influence

In an article in MIT Technology Review titled Who Cares What Everyone Else Thinks?, they found that we develop preferences based largely on social cues. While it might be true by current standards, this is not how preferences are ultimately formed. As people age, preferences tend to be recalcitrant and less malleable.

Social cues suggest that we like things because of peer pressure, not because something is inherently interesting or compelling. Social networks are not the same as human universals, anthropologically speaking. If Margaret Mead or Edward Hall were still with us, they would find Facebook and Twitter profoundly interesting, not just compelling because everyone else is doing it.

The 'superego' of the internet wants to control our behavior, or suggests models of behavior. As it relates to musical preferences, I find it difficult to fathom why anyone would wait to see how good something is before letting the human universals speak for themselves. If it moves you, it (should be) for strictly personal reasons.

Influence is never just skin-deep, or the mere outlines of a digital profile: it should go back to the preferences that we formed as children. Once you have passed the age of forty you finally realize that the roots really start to show.

***

[11/27/2024: There might be two kinds of people: I like it just because I do and need no explanation as to why, and the “I’ll like it if you do” people. There is always the center position, but we don’t really understand how nudges work in either direction. To be in a position of nudging can be fraught with later regrets because it’s a position that sits on a boat of faulty intuition. Or you could use the box color metaphor: the black box (where you don’t have free will), the white box (where you do), and the red box, which leaves your options open. Red box people tend to like to play the field. Roots starting to show is a good thing because that’s the nudge–where your intuition seems more true, and you don’t need swaying].