I found it in Robert Rankin's The Hollow Chocolate Bunnies of the Apocalypse. You've probably guessed from the title of the book that Rankin is not a philosopher of any sort. But he does have a way of pointing out the obvious.
I quote:
Why it is that bad taste always triumphs over good is one those things that scholars love to debate, when they don't have anything better to do, such as getting a life and getting a girlfriend.
Is there actually such a thing as 'good taste'? they debate. Or 'Is it all merely subjective?'
Well, of course there is such a thing as good taste! Some things actually are better than other things, and people are capable of making the distinction.
But...
Bad taste will always ultimately triumph over good taste , because bad taste has more financial backing. There is far more profit to be made from selling cheap and nasty products, at a big mark-up, than selling quality items at a small mark-up. And you can always produce far more cheap and nasty items far nore quickly than you can produce quality items. Far more.
Is there actually such a thing as 'good taste'? they debate. Or 'Is it all merely subjective?'
Well, of course there is such a thing as good taste! Some things actually are better than other things, and people are capable of making the distinction.
But...
Bad taste will always ultimately triumph over good taste , because bad taste has more financial backing. There is far more profit to be made from selling cheap and nasty products, at a big mark-up, than selling quality items at a small mark-up. And you can always produce far more cheap and nasty items far nore quickly than you can produce quality items. Far more.
So, there we have it.