aesthetic choice
TRANSCRIPT
Aesthetic Choice
Kevin Melchionne
Forthcoming in British Journal of Aesthetics, Volume 57 (2017), Number 3, pages 283-298.
Please cite the version appearing in the journal.
Abstract
Our lives are filled with aesthetic choices, that is, choices of objects for aesthetic experience.
Choice is crucial to having a fulfilling aesthetic life. Our immediate satisfaction and long term flourishing
require the ability to generate rewarding aesthetic opportunities. A good aesthetic life is one of good
aesthetic choices. Given the centrality of choice to a good aesthetic life, aesthetic theory is in need of an
account of choice. However, aesthetic choice has gone unexamined. This paper considers how choice
helps to make us who we are as aesthetic persons. I situate aesthetic choice within debates in
contemporary choice theory. The paper also examines whether the recommenders on websites like
Amazon or Netflix pose a risk to our aesthetic flourishing. Aesthetic choice is mostly constructive and
conditional, in other words, ad hoc and easily influenced. Aesthetic choices tend to be small choices,
with low stakes and relaxed deliberation. The effect of our choices is cumulative, and the import of
individual choices is best judged by seeing them in the context of other choices, especially the plans to
which they belong.
Aesthetic Choice 2
Aesthetic Choice
Kevin Melchionne
Our lives are filled with aesthetic choices, that is, choices for aesthetic experience. With an
aesthetic choice, I choose a work of art or object of natural beauty to consume, behold, or appreciate
such as a movie to stream, a tourist destination to visit, or simply a moment to gaze out the window.
When I make an aesthetic choice, I decide to experience a certain object at a certain time and place. I
say, ‘I will watch Memento again this evening‘, ‘I will visit Venice in the spring‘, or ‘I will enjoy the sunset
this afternoon‘.
We select from a bounty of candidates the works of art or natural beauty that we engage. Rare
are the occasions for aesthetic experience that reflect no choice; aesthetic opportunities are rarely
assigned by authorities or picked arbitrarily. Choice is crucial to having a fulfilling aesthetic life. Our
immediate satisfaction and long term flourishing require the ability to generate rewarding aesthetic
opportunities. In this way, choice is a part of our aesthetic sensibility: in addition to our capacity to judge
is our capacity to direct attention to favorable aesthetic opportunities, to have a nose for our own
interests and satisfactions.
An aesthetic choice represents a decision to experience, which is different from a judgement of
taste or appraisal. Of course, judgements often guide aesthetic choices. Considering our prior
experience, we make further choices about future aesthetic objects. When we judge something
beautiful, we often seek more experiences like it. However, our choices are not reducible to our
appraisals and may be motivated by goals and conditions unrelated to them. Unlike judgments, choices
are prospective. When seeking out novel experiences, our motivations run counter to our taste. Also,
Aesthetic Choice 3
the desire for the right flow of new experience may motivate more indiscriminate choices than our
convictions alone might allow. Or, reserving important experiences for the best occasions, we fill more
ordinary moments with more ordinary works of art. Our choices may be wide ranging or narrowly
focused, frequent or rare, idiosyncratic or trend-following. These tendencies in our choices say as much
about who we are as aesthetic persons as our appraisals. A favorable engagement with an aesthetic
object greatly depends on choosing the right object in the first place. A good aesthetic life is one of good
aesthetic choices.
Aesthetic experience does not require choice. Attention can be forced on us by compelling
object such as a stunning sunset distracting us from work on a winter’s late afternoon. Aesthetic choice
is also distinguished from assignment, when attention is directed by some authority, for instance, an
instructor. It is possible—though unlikely—that we can derive a great deal of satisfaction with our
attention fully directed by experts and institutions. However, when we choose, we frame the
opportunity as what we want for ourselves. Our choice serves as an endorsement of the opportunity. In
addition to helping us navigate aesthetic opportunities, choice matters because it supports personal
autonomy, and, on certain views, such choices may be necessary for well-being.1 Choice is not just a
means of exercising personal autonomy; it is the very medium of it. As Ronald Dworkin writes, ‘What
makes a life ours is that it is shaped by our choices‘.2 Our own wants are important not because they are
1 Among philosophers, L. W. Sumner, Welfare, happiness & ethics (Oxford University Press, 1996), esp.
138-182; and Ronald Dworkin, Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2000), 237-284. Among psychologists, Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci,
‘Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-
Being ‘, American Psychologist, Vol. 55 (January 2000), No. 1, 68-78.
2 Gerald Dworkin, ‘Is More Choice Better than Less?’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Vol. 7, No. 1 (1982),
47–61.
Aesthetic Choice 4
good for us (they might not be) but because our lives would not really be our own if we could not pursue
our choices. For Dworkin, a failure to recognize our wants, reducing our well-being to what is objectively
good for us, would be, in his words, a ‘sad mess‘. For Dworkin, our well-being is ‘nondelegable‘, and
choice is necessary to secure it.3
Since the framework for modern aesthetic theory gelled in the 18th century, aestheticians have
been preoccupied with aesthetic judgment and the many questions that it inspires such as the nature of
aesthetic reasons, the intractability of aesthetic disagreements, and the cognitive dimension of aesthetic
experience. Aesthetic choice has gone unexamined. In light of the importance of choice for autonomy,
the neglect of choice by aestheticians seems odd. It makes no sense that the way we choose aesthetic
objects is of no consequence even as the way we judge them takes on utmost importance. In our
aesthetic lives, we are more than just umpires. We actively pursue satisfaction, amusement, and
learning. We have protean appetites and moods. A good deal of time and effort is devoted to the search
for and selection of experiences. If our aesthetic judgments matter, then choice matters, too. Choice
and judgment stand as twin pillars of aesthetic autonomy. Given the centrality of choice to a good
aesthetic life, aesthetic theory is in need of an account of choice. How does choice, as much as taste,
make us who we are as aesthetic persons? Is it possible to characterize good aesthetic choices? What is
role of choice in a good aesthetic life? Do the recommenders on websites like Amazon or Netflix pose a
risk to our aesthetic flourishing?
In this paper, I situate aesthetic choice within debates in contemporary choice theory. Aesthetic
choice is mostly constructive and conditional, in other words, ad hoc and easily influenced. Aesthetic
choices tend to be small choices with low stakes and relaxed deliberation. The effect of our choices is
cumulative, and the import of individual choices is best judged by seeing them in the context of other
choices, especially the plans to which they belong.
3 Dworkin, ‘Is More Choice Better than Less?’, 60.
Aesthetic Choice 5
1. Aesthetic Choice in the Contemporary World
There may be historical reasons for the neglect of aesthetic choice. If one existed, a history of
choice might tell us that, in the past, independence of choice was rarer, more controversial, and more
dangerous. Choices were circumscribed by religious and political authorities. Penalties for inappropriate
choices could be severe. The long and painful history of censorship may serve as the sharpest evidence
for the importance of aesthetic choice. Given the limitations placed on choice in prior centuries, it is
understandable that aesthetic choice may not have been the most urgent consideration for
aestheticians.
Nevertheless, from time to time, choice has been acknowledged as crucial to aesthetic
cultivation. For instance, aesthetic motivations for controlling choice are evident in remarks of the 3rd
Earl of Shaftesbury, who recommended choosing and contemplating only exemplary objects in order to
‘discover amidst the many false manners and ill styles the true and natural one, which represents the
real beauty and Venus of the kind ‘.4 By contemplating masterpieces, the individual internalizes the well-
ordered and harmonious proportions of the object and is better able to distinguish those objects or
actions which possess them from those that do not. Shaftesbury saw this as the way art unites with
virtue in the creation of the exemplary person. Practical advice for making aesthetic choices can be
found throughout popular literature on homemaking and personal style. For instance, Edith Wharton
and Ogdan Codman counsel a similar approach in their Decoration of Houses, advising homemakers that
it is better to decorate with modest reproductions of great works than to surround oneself with
ostentatious originals of inferior quality.5 Expert choosers like Wharton and Codman have long been
4 Anthony Earl of Shaftesbury, Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, etc., (1711; reprint,
Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1963), vol. I, 217.
5 See their discussion of bric-à-brac in The Decoration of Houses (New York: Scribner's, 1907), 184-95.
Aesthetic Choice 6
important cultural players.6 More recently, Marie Kondo has developed a global following and spawned
the profession of the professional organizer, an expert in helping people make choices for their
possessions. In the effort to create more beautiful and manageable homes, Kondo encourages people to
reflect on their possessions and discard everything that does not ‘spark joy’.7 Using Kondo’s method, the
individual purges the home of everything unnecessary and unloved, achieving a spare beauty and
simplicity that Shaftesbury might well have approved of.
The importance of ordering and controlling our exposure to aesthetic objects is evident in
empirical psychological studies. Steven Breckler shows that agents will intuitively control their exposure
to aesthetic objects in order to increase their satisfaction.8 Psychologists have observed that when the
ability to control our exposure is weak, satisfaction wanes. Yet, at the same time, excessive options can
overwhelm actors and lead to decreased satisfaction as they seek vainly to create order out of
overwhelming possibilities.9
One of the strongest indications of the role of choice in aesthetic satisfaction comes from online
and mobile cultural distributors such as Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Spotify. Aiming to replace
yesterday’s tastemakers, these web-based companies use algorithms to generate recommendations
that are likely to interest users. Among the most primitive recommenders is the basic ‘shuffle’ of one’s
6 For instance, Russell Lynes, The Tastemakers: The Shaping of American Popular Taste (1954; reprint,
New York: Dover, 1980).
7 Marie Kondo, The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up: The Japanese Art of Decluttering and Organizing,
trans. Cathy Hirano (Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press, 2014).
8 Steven J. Breckler, Robert B. Allen and Vladimir J. Konežni, ‘Mood-Optimizing Strategies in Aesthetic-
Choice Behavior ‘, Music Perception, Vol. 2, No. 4 (1985), 459-470.
9 Barry Schwartz et al., ‘Maximizing Versus Satisficing: Happiness Is a Matter of Choice‘, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 5 (2002), 1178–1197.
Aesthetic Choice 7
own library on a smartphone where some unpredictable sorting of one’s favorite songs is preferable to a
predictable one. Other attempts are more sophisticated and reflect studied convictions about what
motivates cultural consumers. Retailers have long noticed and attempted to profit from the clustering of
purchases. With its now famous words, ‘Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought…’ Amazon
introduces recommendations based on the clustering of like-minded shoppers. Spotify, the music
streaming service, has a social media dimension with recommendations from friends and public figures
that the user has linked to on the platform. For a la carte distributors like Amazon, the recommender is
a way to motivate additions to the ‘shopping cart ‘, thereby increasing revenue per shopper. For
subscription-based business models like Netflix, an effective recommender is an important part of
creating a sticky user environment, part of what makes the site worth the subscription. With the
emergence of smartphones relying on geolocators and social media apps, the business of online
recommenders promises to become ever more sophisticated.10 In each case, what counts is not just the
vast catalog of cultural objects but also how the app mediates it for the user. With firms closely guarding
data, it is hard to determine the importance of recommenders to the actual experience of the sites. The
features may serve mostly as ‘bells and whistles’, making the services feel deeper and more helpful than
they really are. Yet the mere existence of algorithmic recommenders suggests that, at the core of our
aesthetic lives, rests a choice problem crucial to aesthetic flourishing.
Today, handwringing about the risks of excessive choice is understandable. The marvels of our
electronic devices and the streaming services accessed through them result in a staggering over-
abundance of candidates for our attention. Each year, there are more works of art and more reliable
and convenient—even intrusive—ways of sharing them. The art of the past does not disappear; it is
documented, saved, indexed, recycled, and redistributed with greater volume and velocity. Like all
10For instance, Gillhofer and Schedl, ‘Iron Maiden while jogging, Debussy for dinner? An analysis of
music listening behavior in context‘, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 8936 (2015), pp 380-391.
Aesthetic Choice 8
consumption, aesthetic experience is increasingly customized through ever more specialized sources on
the internet and through devices capable of anticipating our preferences with ever more precision. In a
streaming culture, art has become so easy to make and share that we arrive at the contemporary
moment of extreme disintermediation. The sheer volume of culture distributed electronically along with
the erosion of traditional editorial authority has created something of a crisis of choice. 11 Choice is
overwhelmed by its objects.
In a streaming culture, choice must play a larger role in our lives than ever before. We may be
witnessing a shift in the balance of cognitive burdens in the aesthetic realm; with overload, there may
be a change in the skills required to lead a satisfying aesthetic life. Faced with an over-abundance of
candidates for experience, the skills of navigation and selection rise in importance. As if on cue, the
word curating has entered the popular lexicon in recent years, denoting the filtering practices of
aggregating web-sites and other efforts to sort and order the overwhelming supply of culture. Aesthetic
choice may be one of the emerging cultural problems of our era, making it not just a philosophical
question but also a practical challenge for anyone concerned with aesthetic flourishing.
2. Choice as Constructive and Contingent
As the theory of choice gained traction in philosophy and the social sciences in the second half
of the twentieth century, aestheticians remained on the sidelines. This is not an uncommon situation for
aestheticians, notorious late adopters of intellectual trends. With choice theory, however, aestheticians
were not merely late to the party; they never showed up. It is likely that that the limitations of early
choice theory were a factor. Rational choice theory reconstructs optimal choices, which presuppose a
11 Tom Vanderbilt, You May Also Like: Taste in an Age of Endless Choice (New York: Knopf, 2016); and
Daniel Levitin, The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload (New York:
Dutton, 2014).
Aesthetic Choice 9
stable set of options, a hierarchy of goals, ongoing refinement, and a long-term standpoint.12 Actors
seek to realize goals through choices in the light of facts. An optimal solution generates the best strategy
for maximizing utility over an infinite time horizon. Studies tend to focus on how people calculate the
financial benefit of a trade or gamble. Not surprisingly, this emphasis on probability and economic value
failed to interest aestheticians. Aesthetic activity simply does not fit the economistic tendencies of
rational choice theory.
In a story that is well known to choice theorists but probably less familiar to aestheticians,
choice theory has undergone considerable revision since its early focus on optimization. For Herbert
Simon, Daniel Kahneman and others, rational choice theory does not account for how people typically
make decisions. More complex and psychologically naturalistic models of choice have emerged. These
models acknowledge the complexity of choice frameworks, for instance, the lack of clear, pre-existing
goal hierarchies, the limitations of cognitive powers, the frailty of memory, the influence of emotion,
vulnerability to framing effects, and a variety of other conditions which influence choices.13 Under real
12 For an introductory account of rational choice theory, see Jon Elster, ‘Introduction ‘, Rational Choice
(New York: New York University Press, 1986).
13 Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W., ‘Constructive consumer choice processes.’ Journal of
Consumer Research, 25 (1998), 187–217, here 192. Paul Slovic et al., ‘The affect heuristic ‘, In Gilovich,
T., Griffin, D., Kahneman, D. (Eds), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
(Cambridge University Press, New York, 2002), pp. 397–420. Yaniv Hanoch (2002), ‘“Neither an angel nor
an ant’’: Emotion as an aid to bounded rationality,’ Journal of Economic Psychology, 23, 1–25. James
Bettman and Mita Sujan, ‘‘Effects of Framing on Evaluation of Comparable and Noncomparable
Alternatives by Expert and Novice Consumers,’’ Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (September 1987),
141–154. Schwarz, Norbert (2004), ‘Meta-Cognitive Experiences in Consumer Judgment and Decision
Making ‘, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14 (4), 332–48. Ravi Dhar, Stephen M. Nowlis, Steven J.
Aesthetic Choice 10
world conditions, human cognition simply makes orderly choices very rare.14 It is not that, falling short
of optimization, choice is irrational. Rather, in responding to conditions, the rationality of choice is
conditioned by the situation for choice. Simon coined the term bounded rationality to capture the
complex conditions under which choice typically occurs. He argues that agents’ searches are often
limited to picking the first satisfactory option, which he termed, satisficing.15 Today, satisficing is seen as
only one of several commonly used strategies for choice.16 Over the past thirty years, a vast literature
has emerged devoted to understanding choice in real situations. Much of this research is empirical and
produced by researchers in consumer behavior. With models better suited to cultural consumption,
choice theory now extends beyond computation-based scenarios to a broader range of situations.
Armed with a basket of strategies for choice, consumer choice theorist James Bettman argues
that, along with our preferences, our very methods for determining preferences are disorderly. In other
words, values and rules for choosing both lack hierarchical order. We tend to have a ‘repertoire of
methods’ which comes to us through experience and learning.17 In any situation, the choice of a
strategy—a choice about how to choose—is dependent on the task at hand, for instance, the number of
Sherman, ‘Trying Hard or Hardly Trying: An Analysis of Context Effects in Choice ‘, Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 9(4), 189–200.
14 John W. Payne et al., ‘A constructive process view of decision making: Multiple strategies in judgment
and choice‘, Acta Psychologica, 80, Issues 1–3 (1992), Pages 107–141.
15 Reva Brown, ‘Consideration of the origin of Herbert Simon's theory of “satisficing” (1933‐1947)’,
Management Decision, 42: 10 (2004), 1240 – 1256.
16 Bettman, ‘Constructive consumer choice processes’.
17 Payne et al., ‘A constructive process view of decision making’. See also Paul Slovic, ‘The construction
of preference ‘, American Psychologist, 50 (1995), 364-371.
50, 364–371.
Aesthetic Choice 11
alternatives, the differences between them, the alterability of the choice, number of chances to make
the choice, values associated with the choice, the risks involved in the choice, and the influence of
moods and emotions. Peter Todd and Gerd Gigerenzer argue that, quite often, our choices do not rely
on anything like calculation. Instead, we simply apply a heuristic. Often, these heuristics are easier to
execute and not even meaningfully less effective than calculation.18 The deliberative process itself often
generates changing perspectives, which in turn change how the choice is made. Aimee Drolet and Daniel
He observe that some of the variation in choice strategy is not linked to any effort to make a better
decision. Sometimes, people are simply motivated by the attractiveness of changing methods. There is a
certain amount of ‘churn’ in our strategy for choices which cannot be attributed to changing
conditions.19
For Bettman, this complexity in how we choose suggests that choice is best seen as contingent
and constructive. Contingent means the choice is dependent upon the many conditions that have been
found to influence choice. Constructive means that choosers do not come to decisions with pre-
ordained, architectonically coherent preferences. Nor do they apply consistent methods in choosing. As
Bettman writes, ‘people often do not have well-defined preferences; instead, they may construct them
on the spot when needed, such as when they must make a choice ‘.20 Constructive choices do not
necessarily mean contingent ones. It is possible to have a well-established but contingent preference, in
other words, not made up on the spot but nevertheless very dependent upon certain conditions, for
instance, a well-established preference for ice cream but only on warm days. Rather than a ‘master list’
18 Peter M. Todd and Gerd Gigerenzer, ‘Précis of Simple heuristics that make us smart ‘, Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 23 (2000), 727–741 with responses.
19 Aimee Drolet and Daniel He, ‘Variety-Seeking ‘, Consumer Behavior, in Richard P. Bagozzi and Ayalla
Ruvio (eds), Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing, (John Wiley & Sons, 2010).
20 Bettman, ‘Constructive Consumer Choice Processes’.
Aesthetic Choice 12
of preferences or some ‘invariant algorithm‘, Bettman finds that choices reflect a variety of approaches
without any systematic coherence.
3. Aesthetic Choice as Constructive and Contingent
It is tempting to see aesthetic choice as more stable than the constructive and contingent
choices found in consumer behavior. Given the influence of longstanding cultural traditions and
venerable institutions, we may hastily assume that aesthetic choices are more likely to reflect pre-
existing, context-independent convictions than would choices for ephemeral, consumer items. Given
that cultural traditions orient them, is it reasonable to see aesthetic choices as exceptions from
consumer choice theory? It is likely that aesthetic and consumer choice share many features. Consumer
choices are permeated with aesthetic motivations, and aesthetic choices often have a consumerist
dimension to them. Consumers are influenced by design; aesthetic choosers weigh prices. Conditions for
choice such as elicitation and framing play influential roles in our aesthetic lives just as they do in
consumer behavior. Theatres and museums are among the most powerful framing devices that we have.
Powerful architecture, institutional endorsement, and the usual interested puffery frame our
expectations for art just as advertising does for consumer products. The history of art offers us countless
reversals of artistic style similar to the volatile trends in consumer preferences. While sharing much with
consumer choice, aesthetic choice has certain goals and features that make it especially invulnerable to
efforts to reduce contingency and constructiveness: a. the role of aesthetic choice in everyday leisure; b.
the low risk nature of aesthetic choice; c. desirability of incomplete information; and d. the
unpredictability of creative agents.
Aesthetic Choice 13
a. The role of aesthetic choice in everyday leisure
Aesthetic activity usually belongs to the part of our day devoted to leisure and entertainment. Merely by
virtue of being engaged in a leisure time activity, we tend to put in less effort and generate less
coherence and directedness in our actions. A part of our leisure, aesthetic choices are often made
without much deliberation and stress. Minimal effort helps to maintain high preference fluency, ‘the
subjective feeling of ease or difficulty experienced while making a decision‘.21 Choices for difficult art do
not necessarily imply heavier deliberation. A connoisseur of difficult art is no more likely to agonize over
choosing between Waiting for Godot and Krapp’s Last Tape than another when choosing between X-
Men: Apocalypse and Guardians of the Galaxy.
b. Low risk nature of aesthetic choice
We make many aesthetic choices and, the stakes are typically low. Risk is low in part because
the opportunity cost is low. Choosing one option does not imply forsaking others, which often remain
available in the future. For instance, selecting a movie to stream after dinner is a low risk choice since
disappointment can be addressed on future evenings. For the most part, aesthetic choices are not so
much ‘either/or’ as ‘now-or-later‘. A wrong choice may be subsequently countered with another in a
different direction. Today, streaming further reduces perceived risks since choices can be easily changed
midstream. Whereas almost no one walks out of a movie theatre, one study of streaming films found a
cancel rate of 86%.22
21 Norbert Schwarz, ‘Meta-Cognitive Experiences in Consumer Judgment and Decision Making ‘, Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 14, 4 (2004), 332–48.
22 Hongliang Yu et al., ‘Understanding user behavior in large-scale video-on-demand systems’, EuroSys
'06 Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems, 2006.
Aesthetic Choice 14
On the other hand, a tattoo is a high risk aesthetic choice because the downside of
disappointment can be considerable: a lifetime of looking at and displaying a bad piece of art on one’s
body. In an age of disposable culture, the allure of the tattoo may well be that it is a high risk aesthetic
choice. Another example of a high-risk aesthetic choice is whether to pursue specialized artistic training,
even as an amateur. I speak not of the financial or career risk, but of the aesthetic risk involved in
focusing one’s mind upon one kind of art rather than another or none at all. The intensive commitment
to a particular art form will no doubt change how one sees the world. Watching one film or another on a
Friday night may not mean much for my aesthetic sensibility, but becoming a filmmaker certainly would.
The low risk nature of most aesthetic choice reduces motivations for accuracy, which, in turn
discourages effort in deliberation. As Peter Stone observes, ‘in small decisions, the agent does not have
enough at stake to justify resolving indeterminacies‘.23 With many aesthetic choices, I may not care
much about the accuracy my choice, how optimal it is, or how much justification and review goes into it.
c. The desirability of incomplete information
Certain features of rational choice, such as sufficient information, run counter to the process of
discovery typical of aesthetic experience, especially of narrative works of art. Adequate information is
usually considered necessary for choice. The more I hold the hammer in hardware store, the more I will
know if it is good enough for the job. Extensive research does not undermine my use of the hammer.
But it is well-known that surprise increases the impact of experiences, especially narratives.24
Paradoxically, an aesthetic choice must often be made while maintaining sufficient ignorance to
23 Peter Stone, ‘The Concept of Picking‘, Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, no.
50 (May 2011).
24 Timothy D. Wilson et al., ‘The Pleasures of Uncertainty: Prolonging Positive Moods in Ways People Do
Not Anticipate‘, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 1 (2005), 5–21
Aesthetic Choice 15
preserve surprise in the eventual encounter. I must know just enough to choose but not so much as to
ruin the experience. Reviewers go to great lengths to avoid divulging a spoiler, often providing a ‘spoiler
alert’ to help others avoid stumbling upon undesired knowledge about a story they are considering. For
narrative works especially, choice requires on the part of promoters and reviewers a skillful dance of
selective disclosure.
d. The unpredictability of creative agents.
One of the strongest forces for the contingency of choice in aesthetic realm is art itself. Non-
constructive, context-independent preferences may be undermined by the objects that we encounter,
which, by their nature, may imply alternative goals. In a competitive culture, artists and promoters are
working intensively to alter the landscape of choice, energetically changing rules and conditions for
choice. They do this by inventing new works designed to replace old works, generating a sense of
obsolescence that spurs on the consumption of new works.
Works of art imply their own goals and values. In their effort to appreciate, audiences often take
on a passive relationship to the works’ values, thereby embracing conditional and ad hoc choice
scenarios rather than fighting against them. Passivity in regards to goal hierarchy may have a pay-off in
greater range of aesthetic opportunities. From the standpoint of choice, an overly constructive, non-
contingent approach to one’s aesthetic goals might inhibit one’s capacity to enjoy what is on offer. In
order to be open to the values proposed by the objects, it may be a virtue not to have strong goals.
Rather than falling into snobbism, choosers can be opportunists in a field of dynamic possibilities. They
see the value in (or give the benefit of the doubt to) the opportunities offered by new works of art,
temporarily adopting the values implied by the new offerings in order to appreciate them.
Aesthetic Choice 16
4. Choice as Drift
Given their low-risk and low-stakes, aesthetic choices tend to be fairly informal for most people,
far from Shaftesbury’s recommendation to focus upon the ‘true and natural’ in order to find the ‘real
beauty and Venus’ of any genre. The constructive and contingent nature of aesthetic choice suggests
that individuals do not typically build their aesthetic lives with stable rules and well-ordered aesthetic
goals. In spite of its informal nature, aesthetic choice still matters as the exercise and constitution of our
aesthetic sensibility. How we navigate the conditions of choice says a great deal about who we are as
aesthetic persons.
Sidney Morgenbesser and Edna Ullmann-Margalit distinguish three types of choice (or
‘selection’ in their terminology): opting, choosing, and picking. 25 These types of selection are
distinguished by the magnitude of consequences stemming from the choice. As these things go, the
terminology is a bit arbitrary but the distinction is still useful. Opting and picking represent opposite
poles. For Morgenbesser and Ullmann-Margalit, opting denotes major decisions, often irreversible. They
are ‘crossing-the-Rubicon’ shifts which send us in a certain direction in life. Opting is transformative; it
“changes one’s beliefs and desires (or ‘utilities’); that is, to change one’s cognitive and evaluative
systems.”26 An example of opting in aesthetic choice might be getting a tattoo; a still more dramatic
example would be committing to the study of a certain artistic form like the violin. The commitment to
not just study music in general but the violin in particular will alter one’s sensibility, developing it in
some ways but not others. The choice will change who one is as a musician and perhaps even as a
person. At the other end of the continuum lies picking, which Morgenbesser and Ullmann-Margalit use
25 Sidney Morgenbesser & Edna Ullmann-Margalit, ‘Picking and Choosing‘, Social Research, 44, 4
(1977):757-785.
26 Edna Ullmann-Margalit, ‘Big Decisions: Opting, Converting, Drifting‘, Royal Institute of Philosophy
Supplement, 58 (2006), 157-172.
Aesthetic Choice 17
for arbitrary selections with no perceivable difference in outcome such as selecting a jar of ketchup at
the grocery store. Much advertising amounts to trying to make mere picking look more like opting or
choosing. Most selections, including aesthetic ones, reside somewhere in between opting and picking.
Applying Morgenbesser and Ullmann-Margalit’s taxonomy, most aesthetic choices are middle to small-
sized decisions, marked by low-risk, low stakes, and light deliberation. Although not arbitrary, they
rarely rise to the level of opting.
If aesthetic choices rarely become opting, how do they become important? Taken separately,
most aesthetic choices are not important. On the other hand, we make a lot of them. Taken together,
they add up to something more. Ullmann-Margalit gives the name drift to this steady, cumulative
evolution of sensibility through many low stakes choices, including aesthetic ones. Ongoing small
choices accumulate. Our choices create patterns of experience, zones of comfort, horizons of curiosity.
They lead to habits and expectations for attending to aesthetic objects, what we look for and pay
attention to. We have many chances to notice the outcomes of our small choices. Each choice leads us
to new possibilities for future choices and experiences. We can test, vary, and refine our choices over
time. In this way, taste and choice begin to work together. However, there is no necessary relationship
between our appraisals and our choices, no requirement that choices follow appraisals. Choices follow
appraisals when we seek more of something we like and they do not when we explore something new.
Although our convictions and preferences sometimes guide them, often enough aesthetic choices
depart from convictions in order to fulfill other aesthetic goals, such as variation or exploration.
5. Heuristics for Aesthetic Choice
Drift tells us how small choices eventually matter. But as the word suggests, drift can be aimless,
leaving choosers adrift in an ocean of possibilities. Heuristics are a useful framework for understanding
how the low-risk, light deliberation, and limited research in aesthetic choice still allow for some basic
Aesthetic Choice 18
rules. According to Todd and Gigerenzer, heuristics are ‘simple rules in the mind’s adaptive toolbox for
making decisions with realistic mental resources’.27 Heuristics are ‘fast and frugal’; they do not seek to
gather complete information, optimize or compute probabilities. Instead, they are adaptive to the real
environments in which humans choose, where limited time and energy require a less exhaustive
approach. A prime example of a heuristic is a ‘one-reason’ method; the chooser makes a selection based
on a single criterion and does not seek to weigh it against others. It relies on a ‘stopping rule’ that ends
the search when there is sufficient information to choose.28 For instance, when selecting a travel route,
time, road conditions and scenery may all be factors. Instead of seeking to measure and compare these
different values to determine the optimal route, I choose one and select a route. Heuristics limit the
‘noise’ of many cues, permitting focus on the most salient ones.
For Todd and Gigerenzer, heuristics are extremely powerful tools in stressful situations where
time is limited and a short decision tree is just as accurate as comprehensive testing. They cite
procedures for addressing complaints of heart attacks in emergency rooms. A quick, three-factor inquiry
is just as accurate as extensive testing and saves valuable time. Most elementary heuristics also fit easily
with the lower stakes of aesthetic choice. For instance, the familiar habit of relying on genre when
making aesthetic choices resembles ‘ignorance based decision making’: ‘When choosing between two
objects (according to some criterion), if one is recognized and the other is not, then select the former.’ 29
Selection through recognition is a powerful force in cultural consumption, identified long ago by
publishers churning out slight variations on the detective, romance or sci-fi novel. Similarities between
members of a genre allow the chooser to take baby steps from one experience to the next. The heavy
reliance of celebrities in films is another simple recognition heuristic at work. Likewise, frugality, or
27 Gigerenzer and Todd, ‘Précis of Simple heuristics that make us smart ‘, 727.
28 Gigerenzer and Todd, ‘Précis of Simple heuristics that make us smart ‘, 733.
29 Gigerenzer and Todd, ‘Précis of Simple heuristics that make us smart ‘, 732.
Aesthetic Choice 19
restraint in gathering information, is helpful in dealing with the spoiler problem in aesthetic choice
discussed in Section 3 of this paper: faced with the need to remain ignorant in order to enjoy, I must use
a method which stops me before I have gathered too much information.
Part of what makes heuristics useful is their appropriateness for narrow applications, such as an
emergency room. Todd and Gigerenzer use the term ‘ecological rationality’ to describe this fit between
environment and heuristic. Earlier on, we introduced some features of aesthetic choice that reflect its
‘ecology’: the context of leisure and entertainment, low risk, the need for ignorance, the competitive
creativity of producers, and, perhaps most of all, the surfeit of offerings in contemporary culture. Now,
many of the most general heuristics identified by Todd and Gigerenzer such as the recognition and one-
reason heuristics clearly apply to aesthetic choice. But they apply to a wide range of scenarios for
choice. Does the environment for aesthetic choice enhance the importance of certain heuristics?
Elsewhere, I identify a few heuristics well suited to aesthetic choice, which I call norms of cultivation, or
‘intuitive rules of thumb, aptitudes, skills, or tactics that nurture or sustain aesthetic experience’.30
Among them are a. avoiding overexposure to preferred objects; b. choosing based on the setting; and c.
responding to appetite.
a. Avoiding overexposure means avoiding excessive choices of favorite objects or types of
objects that risk spoiling them. For instance, I am vaguely aware that excessive exposure to stand-up
comedy decreases my enjoyment. After a while, I grow inured to the punch lines and stop laughing. In
order to continue enjoying standup comedy, I limit my exposure.
b. Controlling the setting means choosing aesthetic experiences that are appropriate for
the circumstances under which they will be experienced and avoiding those which would be
30 Kevin Melchionne, ‘Norms of Cultivation’, Contemporary Aesthetics, 13 (2015).
http://www.contempaesthetics.org/newvolume/pages/article.php?articleID=720.
Aesthetic Choice 20
undermined by those circumstances.31 It means choosing not what I like most or think is best but rather
what is right for the moment. An example is eating gourmet sushi on a bench in a bus station. The rush,
grime, and seediness of the station does not establish the right conditions for enjoying this delicacy. To
properly appreciate the sushi, we need the whole ambiance of the sushi bar: the cleanliness of the
space, the chef’s care, precision in the plating, and the unhurried progression from one taste to the
next.
c. Responding to appetite, which we might call the ‘guilty pleasure’ heuristic, means
making choices that reflect inclination or mood at the moment. Appetite is different from taste. Rather
than choosing based on prior appraisals, appetite requires listening to one’s passing feelings and
following them. Appetite answers to personal autonomy and reflects the role of self-indulgence at the
heart of aesthetic life.
Seeking to be more than mere referees for the objects that happen to come before them,
aesthetic choosers rely on heuristics to achieve goals other than appraisal. These guidelines help
choosers get more out of opportunities for experience and have better aesthetic lives. If I pick a work
appropriate for the occasion, follow my appetite, and don’t overdo it, I am more likely to have ongoing
aesthetic satisfaction and a better overall aesthetic life. On the other hand, disregarding norms of
cultivation may increase the chances for disappointment or distraction. Merely choosing what I like or
what I think is the best work of art over and over will not be reliable. I might grow bored; the moment
might not be the right for them; or, my convictions might not match my mood.
Through drift, aesthetic choices make us into the persons we are. But, norms of cultivation
suggest that choices also reflect the person we happen to be. Each of us has a disposition leading to
tendencies for choosing. Whether we focus narrowly or sample broadly may be partly a matter of
31 For an application of this insight to music streaming, see Gillhofer and Schedl, ‘Iron Maiden while
jogging, Debussy for dinner? An analysis of music listening behavior in context ‘
Aesthetic Choice 21
disposition. Likewise, a penchant for whatever is the rage versus curiosity about forgotten backwaters of
culture may reflect who we happen to be. In this way, drift is mediated by disposition, and aesthetic
heuristics help us to accommodate disposition. Heuristics exploit the sensibility of the chooser, not just
the information in the environment.32 If aesthetic choice is seen as part of a learning process, it is not
just learning about the aesthetic opportunities in the world. Good aesthetic choice requires noticing our
responses to these opportunities. Knowledge of disposition helps guide the chooser through the surfeit
of culture. Knowing what kind of aesthetic opportunity is likely to work at a given moment is a kind of
competency or self-mastery at the heart of aesthetic autonomy. To return to Ullman-Margalit’s
metaphor of drift, an aesthetic heuristic is like a rudder that directs the drifting chooser in one direction,
then another, depending on the prevailing winds of personal disposition and cultural opportunities.
Heuristics has become a large and complex branch of decision theory, with its own challenges,
and an uncertain relationship to aesthetic life. In contrast, the field of aesthetic choice is new. One of
the problems with using heuristics to understand aesthetic choice is that champions of heuristics have
defended them on the basis of their objective accuracy. They have been shown to perform just as well
as computation in many scenarios, though not all.33 In the end, computation remains the benchmark for
heuristics. As Nick Chater writes, ‘focusing on simple cognitive heuristics does not make the application
of rational standards derived from formal calculi unnecessary. Instead, it gives a defined role for rational
explanation– to explain why and under what conditions those heuristics succeed in the environment.’34
No such benchmark is available for aesthetic choice. Aesthetic heuristics cannot be tested against
32 Raanan Lipshitz ‘Two cheers for bounded rationality,’ Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23 (2000), 756-
57.
33 For a harsher view of heuristics, see Daniel Kahneman, Thinking Fast and Slow, (New York: Farrar,
Strauss and Giroux, 2011), esp. Part II.
34 Nick Chater, ‘How smart can simple heuristics be?’ Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23 (2000), 745-46.
Aesthetic Choice 22
computational choice methods to determine their accuracy. Like aesthetic judgements, aesthetic
choices are not objective. They reflect a cauldron of motives in an anarchic field of opportunities. The
reasons for considering one or a series of aesthetic choices good or right are complex. It is not clear how
to design an experiment to test for the robustness of an aesthetic heuristic.
In addition, it remains an open, empirical question as to whether aesthetic choice can be
modeled along the lines of any particular heuristics. Do patterns of consumption follow certain basic
heuristics appropriate to the aesthetic environment? Here the millions of individuals using streaming
services may eventually be helpful. Streaming has advantages over other sources of information such as
surveys, which will be distorted by the inevitable posturing that marks self-descriptions of aesthetic
activity. Streaming captures not what we say we like, nor even what we buy but rather what we actually
choose to experience—and later cancel. It also captures the order of choice. For scholars seeking to get
beyond the phoniness that marks so much self-description of cultural activity, streaming patterns offer
not just a reliable window into consumption but also a breath of fresh air.35
6. Aesthetic Plans
Aesthetic heuristics help us to navigate the sea of aesthetic opportunity, avoiding one thing,
gravitating to another. However, they do not offer much in the way of higher purpose for our aesthetic
choices. If choice is indeed important for autonomy, it is not sufficient that we merely exercise it,
rambling from one aesthetic opportunity to the next, satisfied that each one matters by virtue of our
having chosen it. Instead, small choices must add up to something more. What makes some aesthetic
choices better than others?
35 For instance, the ‘long tail’. Chris Anderson, The Long Tail: Why The Future of Business Is Selling Less of
More (New York: Hyperion, 2006).
Aesthetic Choice 23
The answer is that small, ongoing aesthetic choices are good when they are part of a good
aesthetic plan or project. If an aesthetic heuristic is like a rudder for the drifting chooser, then the
aesthetic plan is like a motor. Plans align small choices with larger purposes out of which one builds an
aesthetic life. Through plans, choices can lead to acuity of discernment in one area rather than another.
Our interests and satisfactions grow into competency and discrimination in genres, movements, and
artists.
Plans are often embodied in lists (or queues as Netflix terms them). On customized lists, readers,
viewers, and listeners capture ideas for future experience. Through the list, choices can become a plan
or project for future aesthetic activity. The list describes what to see and in what order. It helps us to
make sense out of the surfeit of culture, leading us to forsake some aesthetic opportunities for the sake
of others. With the list, we can direct the slow drift of aesthetic choice in a certain direction. The list
provides a sense of how individual choices fit into a larger picture of aesthetic purpose. Of course, lists
have long been a feature of aesthetic practice. In the days of broadcast radio, every station had a playlist
designed to court a certain segment of listeners. Museums hang paintings in deliberate order to stage
certain aesthetic insights. Professors of literary history argue about the rightful constituents of the
canon (and nowadays, in the plural, canons). Once relegated to a bulletin board by the card catalog,
reading lists are now globally accessible on sites like Goodreads.com. Amazon, which acquired
Goodreads in 2013, Netflix, and Spotify allow users to make lists. The mere fact that lists are at the
center of the user interface of every streaming service suggests that list making is a core aesthetic
practice.
Taken separately, it is pointless to make much of any aesthetic choice. But it is quite useful to
examine lists for signs of plans. Through the list, we can identify the aesthetic goals and purposes that
Bettman and others do not find in individual choices. When I cluster the films of Grace Kelly to the top of
my queue, taking care to list them in order of production, I am making a modest, short term aesthetic
Aesthetic Choice 24
plan to watch the films of the star. Perhaps the plan will be accompanied by a biography, or at least a
few articles about her on the internet. When, a few weeks later, my list is taken over by the complete
episodes of The Wire, it becomes a highly focused binge-watching project promising several lost
weekends. A still more strenuous project might be the post-war American novel, where a considerable
amount of research and triage might be required to create a decent plan. Such a project might unfold
over years of reading.
If a list seems to lack coherence, gamboling from one genre to the next, it may mean that the list
maker lacks a plan. However, interpreting a list can be difficult because our motivations are often
complex, reflecting a potpourri of hedonic and cognitivist interests. Perhaps, seeking to avoid over-
exposure, the list maker considers novelty to be important and has been built it into the aesthetic plan.
The purpose of such a plan would be to sustain the variety of aesthetic experience over time. In this
way, the list may bear the influence of several different motivations for experience. It may reflect a
desire to remain current with new artists as well as a penchant for the familiar satisfactions of old
favorites. As I make my way through the canon of post-war American novel, I turn out to be incapable of
the single-mindedness required. I need to balance my austere plan with guilty pleasures, interspersing
the novels with episodes of Louis, the television show by the American comedian, Louis C. K.. My
disposition or sensibility requires mixing serious with light, time-intensive with short form. The seeming
incoherence of the list (and the likely confusion of the list maker on this score) may reflect a more
sophisticated albeit still intuitive self-understanding and a more complex plan. In other words, an
aesthetic plan can be mediated by norms of cultivation or balanced with alternative plans. Over a
lifetime of looking at certain kinds of paintings, reading certain kinds of novels or watching certain kinds
of films, a sensibility is forged. As much as my convictions about artistic quality, this self-created ‘shuffle’
makes up my portrait as an aesthetic person.
Aesthetic Choice 25
Not all plans are embodied in lists. The commitment to a creative practice such as painting or
poetry is an especially ambitious kind of aesthetic plan. When we commit to a practice, we seek to
master its rules and traditions. Our aspirations enjoin us to study and practice. The practice sets up a
cascade of aesthetic choices through which perception and skills slowly develop. In this way, an artistic
practice implies a comprehensive aesthetic plan that, over the years, will transform the artist as an
aesthetic person.
7. Aesthetic Plans and Streaming
As with heuristics, the extent to which plans play a role in our aesthetic choices is an empirical
question. Although an avid user of online recommenders may not be able to articulate one, an aesthetic
plan may still be evident in how the algorithm has been groomed over time to deliver aesthetic
opportunities. To be sure, the lists generated on streaming services are not innocent expressions of
users’ preferences. Streaming firms are far from disinterested cultural anthropologists armed with
algorithms. Like the shelves of any bricks-and-mortar retailer, the recommenders of streaming services
are a battleground of commercial interests. Lists of suggestions are used to promote privileged artists;
they push products offering higher margins through lower royalties, internal production, or product
placement. In video, for instance, Netflix and Amazon increasingly promote internally produced, low-
royalty and limited availability content rather than the more expensive offerings of an HBO or Criterion.
Music streaming firms are conceding the limitations of algorithms for choice. Human curation—formerly
known as disc jockeying—is returning.36 An old-school approach relying on the discretion of producers
and promoters is waxing while the once heralded model of the perfect archive is waning. This
36 Reggie Ugwu, ‘Inside The Playlist Factory’, Buzzfeed, July 12, 2016,
<https://www.buzzfeed.com/reggieugwu/the-unsung-heroes-of-the-music-streaming-boom/>
Downloaded July 22, 2016.
Aesthetic Choice 26
unanticipated reversal may be built solely on the economics of internally produced programming and
product placement. However, it may also mean that serendipity and ‘buzz’ are integral parts of a vibrant
environment for aesthetic choice.
Our aesthetic projects are mediated by these commercial interests, but they are not reducible to
them. Nevertheless, online recommenders risk becoming an echo chamber reinforcing the commercial
interests of streaming services, especially as generations grow up without a critical public space of
newspapers and journals. A vital aesthetic plan may help users keep the recommendations of the
streaming firms at arm’s length. The plan serves as a counter to the streaming firm’s interests. At the
same time, users’ experience with streaming services may be improved by taking into consideration the
concept of the aesthetic plan. By allowing multiple lists, retaining viewed items on lists after purchase or
streaming, allowing for notes or links to critical commentary, streaming firms can create space for more
critical and interpretive activity within the process of generating lists.
8. Conclusion
Choice plays a more important role in our aesthetic lives than theorists have acknowledged.
Aesthetic sensibility is typically thought to be constituted out of the judgement of objects that happen
to come before us, that is, our taste. Aesthetic planning helps us make our way through the many
aesthetic opportunities that are before us. Without aesthetic choice, we risk becoming no more than
umpires, giving a ‘thumbs up’ or ‘thumbs down’ to what is on offer. Of course, taste and aesthetic plans
are often closely linked. We often choose what we expect to like. Nevertheless, taste and choice are
distinct, with choice sometimes leading us beyond our taste while sometimes helping us to remain
within its bounds. There is no a priori relationship between them.
Aesthetic choice is highly constructive and contingent. Taken separately, aesthetic choices are
insignificant. They are given some direction through aesthetic heuristics and begin to take on more
Aesthetic Choice 27
systematic meaning as parts of aesthetic plans. Aesthetic plans often take the form of lists or
commitments to a practice. We compose our aesthetic lives through these plans. By better
understanding choices and plans, we better understand the nature of our aesthetic lives and the reach
of rationality within it. The Earl of Shaftesbury’s recommendation to focus on ‘the real beauty and Venus
of the kind’ is advice on how to build small aesthetic choices into big aesthetic plans.