On Quality

There is something mysterious that we call quality that is inherent in some objects, in some actions, in some works of art. We intuitively know it's in there but difficult to identify, to point to.

Quality is somewhat subjective and potentially deceptive in the hands of a maker with not so good intentions. Apparently the ancient Greek philosophers had quite a bit to say on the topic. But can we be sure their thoughts on the matter have been faithfully and comprehensively translated over the years? And did they understand the concept of quality the way we do in the modern world?

 For the ancient Greeks there was no distinction between art and the discipline of making things. 

The word techne was used to encompass the skills and techniques of weaving, pottery and metalworking and over time came to encompass all forms of practical knowledge and expertise including medicine, philosophy and rhetoric.

In the 17th century, the term "technology" began to be used in English to refer to the practical application of scientific knowledge, particularly in the fields of manufacturing and industry. Since then, the meaning of the term has continued to evolve, and today it generally refers to the tools, techniques, and processes used to create, design, and improve products and services across a wide range of industries and fields.

As our technologies have evolved, so too, have our perception of the products of our technologies and part of this is the perception that a certain level of beauty, of quality has been diluted or in some cases completely lost.

We mostly take a dim view of many of these products that are mass produced in plastics and other synthetics.

Robert M Pirsig’s deep dive into Quality in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle maintenance is probably as contemplative as any essay we’re going to find on the topic.

Pirsig argues that these mass produced items are not inherently bad in themselves but they acquire bad associations through our habit of assigning quality, or the lack of it to specific objects.

In one sense quality is a bit like money. We agree it has value even though the medium that denotes its value is next to worthless. In the idea of quality there’s a parallel. We come to agreement about the quality inherent in the things around us but that agreement is more elusive and difficult to quantify. Money can lose value subject to economic events. Equally a high quality product or service can lose value subject to public perception or its ability to continue to serve its function as expected.

Aristotle believed that qualities were inherent in the objects themselves, and could be observed and studied through empirical inquiry. He argued that qualities like beauty, goodness, and truth were objective features of the world, and that they could be understood through a process of logical analysis and careful observation. Pirsig would agree but would add that there’s an element of intuition involved in assessing quality.

For me quality is evidenced by an emotional response to a product, a work of art or a piece of music. The impact of the work is almost instantaneous on encounter, long before there is time to analyse the work for the elements of its production that might distinguish it from more pedestrian work. I would suggest there is a human element to quality that defies objective analysis.

A piece of music created over several weeks in a well equipped sound studio with highly accomplished musicians might result in a fine recording that we can agree to be “high quality”. But another piece of music might be recorded in one or two takes on more basic equipment resulting in a recording that achieves a broader audience and a far greater level of acclaim.

In the first case, if we dig into the process of creating the recording we can find evidence of elements we can readily identify as quality. In the second case the ingredient of quality is more obscure but on listening the emotional reaction to the work may be just as profound, maybe even more so. 

Neither the Greek philosophers nor Robert M Pirsig have provided us with a definitive explanation of quality. We may know it when we see it, at least for the moment, but clearly it is not entirely objective and maybe it’s enough to be able to appreciate the emotional hit we get when we perceive quality, ephemeral though that hit may be.