Good, bad, weird, sold?

[mrissa]

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.)

Comments

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

I'm doubtful about this for beer. I know darned well it's a bad idea for party munchies (especially if you're in an oriental grocery store). Teriyaki grasshoppers are simply no substitute for potato chips!

In fact I'm more and more doubtful in more and more areas the more I think about it.

However, I think I'm assuming one usually has some idea what's *ordinary*. If one really has no clue at all, I guess the choice is inherently pretty random.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Would I rather have teriyaki grasshoppers than a particular brand of potato chips I know to be terrible? Actually I think so. Yes.

Would I predict you, specifically, to react the same way? Heh. Probably not.

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

I think it works better as a hostess gift (or at least that's how I was reading the comment, mostly) than as an approach to life.

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

I got invited to a metrosexual party, so I brought double chocolate stout since what's more metrosexual than chocolate beer? (Possible the fruit beers, but the chocolate was cheaper.)

For what doesn't this work? Hmm. I think it always has a chance of being made of win, but there's some areas it might be more ill-advised--major appliances, cars, children's picture books.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Children's picture books are supposed to be weird! Children's picture books thrive on weird!

There is a cat wearing a hat. For more than the few seconds it takes him to tear the hat off and kill the monkeys. That's very strange and suspect.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Also, how did you know it was a metrosexual party? Was it just that you recognized the people involved as metrosexuals, or was it on the invitations?

[p-j-cleary.livejournal.com]

Clothes. Going for what's weird is either just putting something to take up room in someone's closet or making them wear something that will result in embarassment.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Buying clothes for other people is a dicey proposition at best. But you're right, "get the strangest thing in the store," probably won't do.

[cloudscudding.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't work: clothes, electronics or items required to be functional in a specific way--so for some electronics, weird is good, but for, say, an MP3 player, weird is bad.

Aside from that, I now have a new gift-purchasing algorithm. Yay!

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

Perhaps what the real criteria is, is a price tag and/or need for research. For example, if I am buying a 5 dollar electronic device, it could probably be as weird as it wants, so long as it looks like it won't die immediately. If I am buying a $400 stereo, I probably want to actually find something good.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking this might be an unfortunate thing to do when buying perfume. Or buying a gift for the sort of person who will feel obligated to keep and display your gift, no matter how much they secretly hate it. (Unless of course you're seeking to torture the recipient, but that doesn't seem like a Mrissish tactic.)

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I try to avoid relationships where people will feel obligated to keep and display my gifts no matter how much they secretly hate them. But as I have a niece and three godchildren, probably I am fooling myself about how long I will be able to dodge that sort of thing.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

"For what things does this not work?"

Pharmaecuticals.

B

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Also military weaponry.

B

[callunav.livejournal.com]

I do this a lot, especially with comestibles. I've had some colossal failures, but also some surprising successes, and even the failures have led to entertainment. I think it would be different if I were the host and responsible for supplying the mainstays of a gathering, but usually I'm a guest bringing a contribution, and it's worked out pretty well. That, I think, says a good deal more about the people I hang out with than about the generalizable principle, but I do think that among geeks this works pretty well.

I agree with the many comments above about clothes.

I think the underlying principle may be size/duration. Weird things that may not be too good which will be gone before the evening is over = viable. Weird things which just keep going = a burden. That goes for clothes, which have a long duration. I think it also means that at least for me, short books - thin humor things or wacky phrase-books, or, yes, children's picture books - but not full-length novels. I don't know that many people who are going to stick with a 300-page thing they're not sure they like at all, just for its weirdness value. It'll just sit around, while they decide whether they've had it long enough that they're allowed to throw it away, yet. Similarly, ornamental objects succeed on this principle directly proportionately to size and value: a strange wind-up toy can be a win, but an expensive and bizarre and bulky set of windchimes from Tanzania, less so. That's a different aspect, but one which I see as analogous to duration.

It's the same way that one may be willing to watch a half-hour episode of something bizarre and not necessarily very engaging, and may even find it a source for conversation, but a 2 hour movie with the same qualities is just an imposition.

...I think I had more permutations to offer, but my brain turned off. Whoops.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I think I'm the opposite where books are concerned: I think I'm more likely to be interested in a 500-page history of the role of rennet and gelatin in the 1928 US presidential election than in a short little joke book. If either is bad, I will give it away, but more short little joke books have been bad, in my experience. Am not a fan of the genre.

Oooooh, Tanzanian windchimes....

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Wine.

B

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Engagement rings.

B

[tanaise.livejournal.com]

So not true there! At least for me--I'd rather have something quirky and cheap than something that cost more than any one of my parents' cars. (Which I think puts the price range around 400.) But I have a near pathological fear of losing my jewelry--it's bad enough with just sentiment attached, heaven forbid it also have monetary value.

[aedifica]

I think it sounds like a good rule for anything trivial enough not to require research. And if you're going to be researching, then you should certainly be able to figure out the good thing and get it!

Though callunav's point about duration is also well taken.

[pieslut.livejournal.com]

I think this works great for things that are cheap. We recently had to go lamp shopping for our dining room. We really wanted something beautiful, but just could not deal with the prices. The only ones less than a $100 were so damn boring I nearly cried at the thought of them in our new condo. Combined with the fact that we have no interior design genes, this made things difficult. But then, we saw indoor paper lanterns at $10 a piece, in lots of cool colors and shapes, and we were saved.
It's better to have something weird than something boring. Especially if the boring ones cost more.

[bradipo.livejournal.com]

I think your strategy will work great in the situation that you describe it for, where lots of other people are also bringing things.

If you bring weird beer to a party at which a third of the other people also brought beer, then I think there's a very good chance that someone there will like it, or at least be intrigued--even very weird beer that almost no one likes will not go to waste.

So, I think it would work fine with cheese at a wine-and-cheese party, where there will be ample non-weird cheese options. It would also, I suppose, work with maps at the sort of party where there will be many other map options available, or even with haircuts at the sort of party where there will be other haircuts available. (Although, I confess, I've not been to either of these sort of parties.)

On the other hand, if you're the only person bringing beer, it seems like a high-risk strategy.

[mmerriam.livejournal.com]

I think it wouldn't work for high-end priced items of any sort, and for very specific things (such as the mentioned mp3 player).

However, I'm always game for trying weird beers, wines, cheeses, and certain other food items.

[songwind.livejournal.com]

I think this approach might work for everything... for the right people. There is probably someone who values "weird" as a feature for just about any type of gift.

Things for which I think that audience is very small:
Underwear
Religious texts
Healthcare equipment

[mkille.livejournal.com]

Actually, "weird" works for all three of those for me...

[prettymuchpeggy.livejournal.com]

Air conditioners
Chairs (as the wierder they get the harder it is to sit upon them)

(Hee hee hee... you all, are just great! *sigh* tee hee *snork*)

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Dare I ask you what your experience of weird air conditioners is?

I have experience of bad air conditioners, but that's a bit different.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

If one is in that bracket: cars. Though some might be really thrilled to get a three-wheeled, hand-painted, wood-sided Morgan. Or a Messerschmitt.

Still, the observation about durability, above, strikes me as sound. The longer someone might be lumbered with something, the less likely that Go For the Weird will be reliable.

Tattoos. I'm thinking tattoos might be another poor choice.

[biguglymandoll.livejournal.com]

I dunno. Everyone has a tattoo that says "Mom" - one is more likely to get comments and questions with a tattoo of a dancing bear captioned "Support the 2nd Amendment!"

(Note that when I say everyone has a tattoo that says "Mom" I mean of course that I've seen 2 of them. Although it would have looked odd on, say, Pallas Athene.)

I was going to suggest children, but the more I thought about it, weird wins there all the time. ;-)

[writingortyping.livejournal.com]

There is, unfortunately, a subset of people for whom this strategy would backfire with a loud cat-alarm "whump." Again unfortunately, it's not an easily-definable group - more an "I know it when I see it" categorization. My mom's side of the family and my in-laws both qualify (luckily my mom and my husband are both the cuckoos in the family nest).

With them, anything weird is definitely suspect, even if it's something we've tried and can vouch for. They are only comfortable with the already-known, and "familiar and bad" is always safer than "weird and possibly good." The reactions can range from the unpleasant (my grandmother's waspish way of saying, "Well, *I* never heard of it,") to the borderline polite (my in-laws' New England-style, "Well, that's *interesting*."). Either way, it's uncomfortable for everyone to try weird out on them. What's truly unfortunate is that weird for them is often banal for us, and we've put a foot wrong many times by inadvertently introducing them to something new and very weird in their world.

[talyx.livejournal.com]

When buying something as a gift or hostess offering, I routinely pick the most aesthetically pleasing label, r the one I think the recipient will like best.

Note: This is rarely a good plan with cheese.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

In a related note, I know people who search eBay using the term "weird."

B

[pezwitch.livejournal.com]

Personally, I am quite fond of your theory. We've tried it with beer at a gathering with careswen and mmerriam years ago, and the beer was just. awful. But we had a very entertaining time daring each other to drink it.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

If you're planning to feed it to fans, some weird is good, as long as you also have some not-weird. If it's a gift that's meant to match someone's taste, or demonstrate your own, weird might or might not be good.

It seems likely to always work for candles (for any unusual gift store candle I can think of).

K.