ABSTRACT
One might challenge the implication here that espousing relational sociology clears Hennion of the charge of relativism, for surely relativism is about aesthetics whereas relationalism is a matter of epistemology?1 But for Hennion, I suggest, epistemology and aesthetics cannot be properly separated. The aesthetic is mediated, socially constructed, and therefore relational, which means that “taste, pleasure, and meaning are contingent, conjunctural, and hence transient” (Hennion 2003c, p. 84). Contingency, however, is not the same as relativity. After all, Hennion’s music lovers make value judgments all the time in the course of their evolving aesthetic experiences. For him, pragmatism is in fact the only theoretical position to take such judgments seriously, by setting out to account for aesthetic pleasure in situ, experientially. And having studied such judgment-making at close quarters, as an ethnographer would, he claims to be confident that the amateur’s evolving competence will make short work of distinguishing between Beethoven and Britney Spears (Hennion 2005c).
