The idea of an optimum existing was brought up in class, and I haven't stopped thinking about it since it was first mentioned. Jack alluded to the length of Marilyn Monroe's famous white dress — if it was too short, it risked being deemed too promiscuous, but it it was too long, it would have been called chaste. It seems that the image would have lost significance if the dress was of any other length, be it shorter or longer. This then raises the question — who determined what the optimum length of Marilyn Monroe's dress?
I think it is extremely fascinating to put things into perspective in these terms; there is an optimum for everything. There is an optimum speed for the ceiling fan to turn at such that the room temperature is at an even 68, and an optimum softness to the bed that deters me from tossing and turning all night long. There is an optimum to Mona Lisa's smile that makes it compelling, and so one of the most famous pieces of art in history. The more I think about it, the more I find it difficult to counter the fact that indeed, everything has an optimum attached to it.
This catapulted me into imagining a world where world renown paintings never actually met their respective optimum, and other artists who struggled to get their art out had met their own optimums. What if it was possible to calculate what the optimums for objects and concepts were? It could practically act as a formula to predict the next trend; certainly it strips media of its entertaining factor quite largely. If determining the optimum somehow becomes possible, I honestly believe that industries would only employ it for capitalistic purposes. A dress shorter than Marilyn Monroe's could have effectively changed the course her career took; if we could find out what audiences would pay most money to see, it changes the entire game.
Perhaps it is best that the optimum stay unknown.
No comments:
Post a Comment