The Mob Mentality of Art: Whose Opinion Is It Really?

It seems as though it was yesterday that Quentin Tarantino released one of the final films of his career. I still recall the overwhelming publicity and collective excitement surrounding Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, with critics and cinephiles alike praising its Golden-Hollywood homages, the All-Star cast, and the nonlinear fantasy-like storyline. Some even argued that it deserved the title of Tarantino’s best work.

Having previously watched Pulp Fiction and all the volumes of Kill Bill, I can personally attest to Tarantino’s customary attention to detail and eccentric style of directing. So, as soon as I heard that the movie finally hit the cinema screens, I was urged to go see it for myself. Despite this ample enthusiasm, the film failed to live up to my expectations. Although the fusion of genres and production design was commendable, the lack of substance, the underdevelopment of numerous characters (such as Margot Robbie’s Sharon Tate), and the dragged out plotline marred the film’s overall feel.

Yet, I felt pressured to keep my controversial views to myself. As a twenty-year-old university student, who am I to argue against the merit of Tarantino, renowned film critics, and the acting of stars like Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt? To voice an opinion that contradicts this movie’s status as a masterpiece would render me uncultured, lazy, and too ignorant to comprehend the film’s cinematic complexity.

My personal inaptitude to challenge public opinion pinpoints a greater phenomenon in the realm of the arts. As individuals, we tend to distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ works merely on the basis of predominant social beliefs, rather than our own understanding of what constitutes artistic merit. Many of us are incapable of justifying the opinions we possess, simply internalizing those of the majority.

According to Durkheim’s social theories of development, humans are social creatures that attain most of their personality traits, values, and opinions through the process of socialization. This idea affirms that humans acquire numerous elements of their identity by interacting with other members of society, implying that the surrounding environment carries a considerable weight on our perceptions of the world.

Hence, if our society defines certain artworks or literary pieces as ‘classics’, we subconsciously begin to view them as such. For instance, though I truly admired the movie Gone With The Wind, it was shown to me under the pretense of being one of the most esteemed movies in classical cinema, but it was impossible to determine whether my appreciation derived from the film’s intrinsic merits or my preconceived positive notions of it.

Even though I still affirm the fact that this movie deserves to be classified as a cinematic masterpiece, I wasn’t able to come to this conclusion myself: rather, I internalized the collective opinion, which ultimately formed my own stance. We are all culpable of attributing social beliefs as our own, pushing us to perpetuate homogenous beliefs from generation to generation. In turn, it becomes almost impossible to revolutionize this collective structure of ideas.

This phenomenon is precisely the reason why the current literary canon has been under critique for decades. Even though it perpetuates unequal recognition of literary works and excludes a variety of talented writers, we are unable to question it due to its association with privilege, merit, and collective acceptance.

The irony stems from the fact that approximately 4 million books get published on a yearly basis, yet the canon remains unaltered. Is it truly possible that not a single one of these new works can attain the same level of praise and recognition?

 Alternatively, consider the work of Andy Warhol. Initially, he was viewed with disdain, criticism, and indifference, as he broke away from the established art norms of the time; he faced considerable controversy due to the dual nature of his work as being both a product and an artwork. However, all the artists we are so fond of today, such as Monet, Picasso, or Van Gogh were groundbreaking for a reason. They challenged the accepted standard, and only after a period of initial criticism were they able to redefine the art status quo.

Now, their work constitutes universally recognized masterpieces. Their names are synonymous with ‘greatness’.

If we simply dared to question the norm and accepted the possible existence of renowned works beyond our knowledge, our current cultural landscape would differ considerably.

Still, many lack the bravery to deviate from accepted beliefs since the ability to successfully change people's views is slim, whilst the threat of criticism remains high. Human beings actively seek approval and acceptance from others, which feeds into our ego and enhances our self-perception. To voice any opinions that juxtapose those predetermined by society will jeopardize this position of acceptance, consequently harming our self-esteem. In turn, the urge to protect our social status predominates our ‘moral duty’ to break the silence.

This dilemma is only aggravated by our excessive media consumption since the intake of information no longer derives merely from social interactions. Instead, our exposure to opinions and ideas - which are often times unqualified - is no longer voluntary, as we are predisposed to them everywhere, ranging from social media platforms to television. The faster spread of information only feeds the mob mentality, as it strengthens the predominant beliefs and further reduces the risk of deviation from this standard.

The more we process and interpret information, the less likely we are to question it; we internalize it subconsciously. We begin to accept certain ideas simply from our excessive exposure to them. As individuals, it appears as though adopting the mentality of the majority - the so-called mob - is simply more convenient. The concept of respectful discourse and argumentation has slowly vanished.

The irony that results is that we all possess opinions about films, arts, and other realms of social life, though we don’t fully comprehend why we have them or what they mean. However, by acknowledging the aforementioned biases, we should become more eager to objectively investigate the truth and question the world around and within us. We need to ensure that we can objectively perceive our environment not only through society’s eyes, but also through our own.

Going against the mob and effectively challenging the norm could redefine our society for the better. After all, progress cannot coexist without plurality of voices and diversity of opinion.