On the Nature of Memeology: Objective Quality and Formulas

Like any element of culture, memes are subjective. However, one must be able to separate personal preferences from objective reality. The fact that everyone looks at the memes in their own way still doesn't interfere with assessing them from multiple angles.

Objective Quality?

Honestly, I am not sure if there such thing as an "objective quality", since the very concept of "quality" is pretty subjective. Nevertheless, there must still be some objective principles of meme analysis, on which every memeologist would rely. Personally, I identify three main criteria for evaluating memes:
1) Context — the connection of a meme with the community, author, certain events, and the conditions of its appearance, as well as all the individual incarnations of a meme. This is not a fundamental criterion, but it's no less important than the others. Since when acquiring a new incarnation, the meaning, and embodiment of a meme changes, each "life" must be considered separately, but one should still consider it as a part of a single meme.
2) Unity of the Idea/Shape — a meme itself and its embodiment. That allows you to evaluate the meme as a "thing in itself", a separate cultural unit, something that doesn't depend on the context nor everything else.
3) Spread — the influence of a meme, its importance in society. This includes explanation of such a thing as "cancer".

Each of the branches is important and is an integral part of a united system, but it is necessary to be able to evaluate each one separately, as well as integrate them into the complete picture. There are no uniquely bad and uniquely good memes, and every meme does need a careful analysis from the point of view of these branches. The ambiguous approach is important, which changes from meme to meme, but at the same time relies on unified evaluation criteria. Also, don't judge the entire meme by a mememe (a separate picture), even the original one. As for the comparison of memes, it might be appropriate only if memes have common features in any of the three criteria (so, compare only in the context of these criteria). Comparison of several lives of one meme also might work.

Of course, such a number of factors adds inaccuracy to memeology, but does it have to be accurate at all? For example, is it even possible to derive any formulas or algorithms?

Formulas and Algorithms?

So far, no one has seriously tried to derive a meme formula, but I think that sooner or later someone will try to do it. Well, I should immediately say: it's pretty meaningless. Since quality is assessed under the influence of many factors, it is impossible to express it in numbers. It is much more useful to learn how to track the patterns of development of web culture and society as a whole. Although, let's suppose that the hypothetical formula of the perfect meme does exist. In this case, it should work in both directions, both for evaluation and for creating. We already know the three branches, but what about making memes? It's impossible and simply not necessary to derive any specific "formula of quality"; if the memes are art, it is the same as if we would try to create a painting according to the prepared algorithms. Of course, the author can (and should, in theory) apply some basics of aesthetics, achieve good image quality and geometric alignment, choose an authentic font, and even create a unique atmosphere, but there are no ready-made formulas and recipes for this. Moreover, it's not that important as it seems. When creating memes, you need to take into account as many factors as in the assessment, and there is simply no "perfect meme".

In general, the value of memes cannot be expressed by the formula, since this is influenced by too many circumstances, and even the "worst meme in the world" may turn out to be the most ingenious, for example, in terms of shape, original idea or, finally, spread. There are still some criteria for a good meme, but they are, in truth, rather blurred. The main requirement is the application of enough amount of effort and some of the rules outlined above. Nevertheless, a meme can win on the part of the form, being quite poor at the idea, or maintain a balance of both, but become cancer because of a suddenly increased popularity. A great example here is the Ugandan Knuckles, originally a high-quality drawing, developed into a 3D model; then, into an entire religion, which then fell down into cancer. It is obvious that it's also impossible to calculate the algorithms by which a meme becomes a cancer.

Perhaps the effect of surprise is the essence of the popularity of memes. No one knows what will become a trend in the near future, and very few people can foresee it. Nevertheless, it is possible to try to predict the nearest trends and reveal what society needs most at the given time, but success is not guaranteed. In any case, it's very interesting and useful to analyze and build theories of future memes. The more theories there are, the higher the chance that one of them will be true. Memes are too spontaneous elements to master, as they do not obey clear formulas; they, like the development of society itself, are logical, but are not friendly with excessive accuracy.

The question is, does a common man need all this? Since over time, memes gain weight and value in society, and also gradually become more complicated, any person interested in this culture needs to learn how to correctly evaluate memes, relying not on subjective perception, but on a clear analysis. In a perfect world, people operating personal preferences would have less authority in meme questions, but overall, it leads to the more global question of memeology spread which always be a thing only for the people that are truly interested in it.