More cheerfully quoted in an Amanda Cross novel

"Art, if it doesn’t start there, at least ends,
Whether aesthetics likes the thought or not,
In an attempt to entertain our friends." -- W. H. Auden

And this is no bad thing, especially if we have good and thoughtful friends.

(Thank you.)

Also, all right, Ms. Cross/Dr. Heilbrun, allrightallrightallright, I give, I went and requested some Auden from the library and put another bit on my Amazon list. But only a bit, because what I really thought I might want most was in the $70 range, and I thought I'd better try some of the other stuff first just to make sure. Uff da sheesh, with the Auden already. You got me. Now don't go obsessing on someone really odious in later novels; I already thought I might want to read more Auden, but I am capable of drawing rather firm boundaries on this sort of thing.

(Though you wouldn't know it from my library list.)

Good, bad, weird, sold?

I have a theory of buying stuff for other people that I'm running past you people to see if it's sound:

If you don't know what's good, buy what's weird.

I mean, obviously, "find out what's good" should be a preliminary step when possible. But this came up when timprov and I were discussing my theories of buying beer for other people's consumption, since I am a non-beer-drinker. I get things I recognize markgritter as having bought before. But if I'm looking for variety for a party and don't recognize enough stuff as good, I grab something that looks totally off-the-wall, on the theory that drinking bad or mediocre beer they've never had before is at least going to be a data point for people, whereas drinking very familiar bad or mediocre beer is just depressing and pointless.

For what things does this not work? (Note: this is not rhetoric proclaiming, "This works for everything!" It's a genuine question.)